SHAWN A. TYSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Affirming first-degree murder convictions but reversing mandatory life-without-parole sentences for a sixteen-year-old defendant under Miller v. Alabama, which prohibits mandatory LWOP for juvenile homicide offenders.
Mandatory sentences of life without parole for juvenile offenders convicted of first-degree murder violate the Eighth Amendment and must be reversed for resentencing.
[1] Mandatory sentences of life without parole for juvenile offenders convicted of first-degree murder violate the Eighth Amendment and must be reversed for resentencing in accordance with Miller v. …
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceShawn A. Tyson was sixteen years old when he committed two counts of first-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility o…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Miller V. Alabama cases and more on FLexlaw
Shawn A. Tyson appeals his judgments and sentences for two counts of first-degree murder. We affirm his judgments without discussion. However, as the State concedes, we must reverse his sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole pursuant to the holding in Miller v. Alabama, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), because Mr. Tyson was sixteen years old when the crimes were committed. In Miller, 132 S.Ct. at 2460-61, the Supreme Court held that a sentencing scheme requiring a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. We must therefore reverse Mr. Tyson’s sentence and remand his case for a new sentencing hearing in compliance with Rodriguez-Giudicelli v. State, 143 So.3d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). As this court did in Rodriguez-Giudicelli, we certify the same question of great public importance:
WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISION IN MILLER V. ALABAMA, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), WHICH INVALIDATED SECTION 775.082(1)’S MANDATORY IMPOSITION OF LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE SENTENCES FOR JUVENILES CONVICTED OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER, OPERATES TO REVIVE THE PRIOR SENTENCE OF LIFE WITH PAROLE ELIGIBILITY AFTER 25 YEARS PREVIOUSLY CONTAINED IN THAT STATUTE?
39 Fla. L. Weekly at D1089,143 So.3d 947.
Judgments affirmed, sentences reversed, and question certified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012)
- Rodriguez-Giudicelli v. State, 143 So. 3d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)