TA HEEM BLAKE, 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.
Ta Heem Blake, convicted of first-degree murder and armed burglary as a juvenile, challenged his sentences. The appellate court affirmed his sentences but remanded for determination of whether Blake is entitled to judicial review of his life sentence after twenty-five years under Florida law.
The court affirmed Blake's life sentence because he received the individualized sentencing hearing required by Miller v. Alabama, but remanded for the trial court to determine whether Blake is entitled to judicial review of his sentence after twenty-five years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes.
[1] A court may affirm a sentence for armed burglary while remanding for further determination regarding a sentence for first-degree murder.
[2] A defendant convicted of first-degree murder, who was seventeen years old at the time of the offense, is entitled to an individualized sentencing hearing considering the factors outlined in Miller v. …
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“Because Blake received the individualized sentencing hearing discussed in Horsley v. State, 160 So.3d 393 (Fla.2015), we affirm his life sentence.”
Establishes that compliance with Miller v. Alabama's requirement for individualized sentencing hearing supports affirmance of the life sentence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBlake was seventeen years old when he committed first-degree murder, armed burglary of a dwelling, and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon. The ju…
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 Judicial Review Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
*17BY ORDER OF THE COURT.
Upon consideration of Appellant’s amended motion for rehearing, motion for written opinion, and motion for rehearing en banc, filed April 30,2015,
IT IS ORDERED that the Appellant’s amended motion for rehearing is granted in part and denied in part; the motion for written opinion is granted in part and denied in part, and the motion for rehearing en banc is denied. This court’s opinion dated March 11, 2015, is withdrawn, and the attached opinion is issued in its place.
Ta Heem Blake challenges his sentences for first-degree murder and armed burglary of a dwelling. We affirm Blake’s sentence for armed burglary without comment. We affirm his sentence for first-degree murder but remand for a determination of whether Blake is entitled to review of his life sentence pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2014).
Blake was convicted of first-degree murder, a capital felony; armed burglary, a first-degree felony punishable by life; and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, a second-degree felony. The jury specifically found that Blake discharged a firearm which resulted in death and that during the course of the aggravated battery Blake , discharged a firearm resulting in great bodily harm. Blake was seventeen years old at the time he committed the crimes.
Following a motion to correct sentencing error, the trial court conducted an individualized sentencing hearing at which it heard witness testimony and applied the Supreme Court’s rulings in Miller v. Alabama, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), and Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010). After expressly eon-sidering the factors outlined in Miller and now codified in section 921.1401, the court resentenced Blake to, life without the possibility of parole on the murder conviction.
Because Blake received the individualized sentencing hearing discussed in Horsley v. State, 160 So.3d 393 (Fla.2015), we affirm his life sentence. However, we remand for the trial court to determine whether Blake is entitled to judicial review of his sentence after twenty-five years. See § 921.1402(2)(a); Horsley, 160 So.3d at 408.
Affirmed; remanded.
KHOUZAM and SLEET, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012)
- Horsley v. State, 160 So. 3d 393 (Fla. 2015)
- Graham v. Florida (1st Cir. 2010)