STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES MICHAEL BROWNE, 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.
The State appealed a downward departure sentence imposed on Browne for a second probation violation. The trial court sentenced Browne to 51 weeks in county jail, below the minimum 15.15 months required by the Criminal Punishment Code, citing his youth as a mitigating factor. The appellate court reversed, holding that youthful age alone, without evidence of diminished capacity or inability to appreciate consequences, does not support a downward departure.
The court held that the downward departure sentence was not supported by competent, substantial evidence. Youthful age alone is insufficient to establish the mitigating factor that a defendant was too young to appreciate the consequences of his offense; evidence of diminished mental capacity or other mental deficit is required.
[1] A downward departure sentence must be supported by competent, substantial evidence for the statutory basis relied upon by the trial court.
[2] Youthful age alone is insufficient to establish the mitigating circumstance that a defendant was too young to appreciate the consequences of their offense.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“When analyzing a downward departure sentence, appellate courts must first determine whether "the trial court applied the correct rule of law and whether competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court's reason for imposing a downward departure sentence."”
Establishes the two-part test for reviewing downward departures
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrowne committed attempted burglary of a dwelling and petit theft at age 21 and was sentenced to three years probation. At age 23, after completing 18…
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 Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
The State appeals the downward departure imposed on Appellee James Michael Browne’s-sentence for his second violation of probation. Because the only statutory basis given by the trial court for the downward departure is not supported by com*378petent, substantial evidence, we reverse. Though the lowest permissible sentence under the Criminal Punishment Code was 15.15 months in the Department of Corrections, the trial court imposed a downward departure sentence of 51 weeks in the county jail. ’ See § 921.002(1)’(bj, Fla. Stat. (2015).1 The trial court’s reasons for imposing the downward departure were that Appellee had no prior record, the crimes were a third-degree felony and a first-degree misdemeanor, and he was toó young to appreciate the consequences of the original offense and the alleged probation violations.
The record reveals that Appellee was 21 years old ¡at the time he committed his initial, offenses: ..attempted burglary of a dwelling and petit theft. Pursuant to his plea agreement, Appellee was sentenced to three years probation for those crimes. After completing a year and a half of probation at the age of 23, he committed a second violation of probation by driving under the influence. The 51-week sentence in county jail was given in connection with Appellee’s no contest plea to the second violation.
When analyzing a downward departure sentence, appellate courts must first determine whether “the trial court applied the correct rule of law and whether competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s reason for imposing a downward departure sentence.” State v. Leverett, 44 So.3d 634, 636 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (citing State v. Mann, 866 So.2d 179, 181 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)). Section 921.0026(2), Florida Statutes (2015), sets forth a list of mitigating circumstances that permit the imposition of a downward departure. Only one reason given by the trial judge at the time of the offense, that Appellee was too young to appreciate the consequences of the offense, is found on that list. § 921.0026(2)(k), Fla, Stat. (2015). The defendant bears the burden of proving a departure factor by the preponderance of the evidence. See State v. Silver, 723 So.2d 381, 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
Youthful age, alone, is not sufficient proof of the aforementioned mitigating factor. Leverett, 44 So.3d at 637-38. Although Appellee notes that he has only completed the tenth' grade, there was no evidence presented to establish that he “suffered from diminished mental capacity or other mental deficit which prevented him from maturing enough by age 23 to appreciate the consequences of his offenses.” State v, Jerry, 19 So.3d 1167, 1170 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (citing State v. Williams, 963 So.2d 281, 283 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (holding that the defendant being 22 years old “would hardly place him in the category of being too young to appreciate the consequences of driving with a revoked license”)); see also State v. Salgado, 948 So.2d 12, 15-16 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (finding downward departure unwarranted where no evidence that the 21 year old defendant was emotionally immature, lacked ordinary intelligence or was otherwise unable to appreciate the consequences of his offenses).
We find there was no' competent, substantial proof that Appellee was too young to appreciate the consequences of his offenses. Therefore, the trial court erred in imposing the downward departure sentence. We reverse and remand for further proceedings. Appellee shall.be presented with the opportunity to withdraw his no contest plea to the charged second violation of probation and proceed to violation of probation hearing or to be sentenced in conformance with the Criminal Punishment Code, which may include a new downward departure sentence as long as it is supported by a legally sufficient basis. See Jackson v. State, 64 So.3d 90, 93 (Fla.2011); State v. Reith, 43 So.3d 909, 910 *379(Fla. 2d DCA 2010); State v. Ahua, 947 So.2d 637, 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Milici, 219 So. 3d 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…ward departure sentence. First, we must “determine whether ‘the trial court applied the correct rule of law and whether competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s reason for imposing a downward departure sentence.’ ” State v. Browne, 187 So. 3d 377, 378 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (quoting State v. Leverett, 44 So. 3d 634, 636 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)). Second, if the “trial court’s reason for departure was in accord with the law and supported by competent, substantial evidence, the appellate court must th…
-
State v. Lackey, 248 So. 3d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)…ure. See State v. Carlson, 911 So. 2d 234, 236 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) ("[T]he trial court may not impose less than the lowest permissible sentence required by the Code unless the defendant establishes a valid basis for departure."); State v. Browne, 187 So. 3d 377, 378 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) ("The defendant bears the burden of proving a departure factor by the preponderance of the evidence."). "A trial court must impose a guidelines sentence unless the court finds that the evidence supports a valid reason for…
-
State v. Saunders, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D995 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)…5, D996 (Fla. 2d DCA Apr. 30, 2021) ("Legal grounds are set forth in case law and statute, and facts supporting the ground must be proved at trial by 'a preponderance of the evidence.' " (quoting Banks, 732 So. 2d at 1067)); accord State v. Browne, 187 So. 3d 377, 378 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) ("The defendant bears the burden of proving a departure factor by the preponderance of the evidence."). In this case, the State contends that there was no valid legal basis for the departure sentences. See Carnes, 46 Fla. L…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jackson v. State, 64 So. 3d 90 (Fla. 2011)
- State v. Mann, 866 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- State v. Noe Salgado, 948 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- State v. Silver, 723 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- State v. Leverett, 44 So. 3d 634 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
- State v. Tirone Alonza Jerry, 19 So. 3d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- State v. Terumbar Ahua, 947 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- State v. Reith, 43 So. 3d 909 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- State v. Williams, 963 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)