DANIEL KEVIN ROSS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Futo Charles v. State, 204 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)
  …ek trial and may well have sentenced Charles based on lawful considerations. However, the judge was silent as to the reasons supporting the sentence. A judicial silence often masks constitutional violations in sentencing. See Alfonso-Roche v. State, 199 So. 3d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (Gross, J., concurring). While it is not required by the criminal rules, the American Bar Association recommends that sentencing courts “always provide an explanation of the court’s reasons sufficient to inform the parties, appel…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Mendoza-Magadan v. State, 217 So. 3d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
  …l case. Without transparency in the sentencing decision, it cannot be known whether a trial court considered appropriate factors or relied on impermissible ones. Judicial silence operates to conceal sentencing misconduct. See Alfonso-Roche v. State, 199 So. 3d 941, 951-52 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (Gross, J., concurring). However, the applicable statute does not require transparency and neither the Florida nor the United States Supreme Court have ever established a constitutional basis for requiring it. Although i…
• Andrews v. State, 207 So. 3d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
  …fendant has a stable domicile, not whether he traveled from another county to commit the crime. There does not appear to be any authority specifically discussing this subsection, or any binding case law on the issue. But see Alfonso-Roche v. State, 199 So. 3d 941, 949 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (Gross, J., concurring) (“[I]t is not as if there is a rational market theory of criminality where would-be criminals make an empirical study of sentencing practices before deciding on the geographical location of their crim…

Authorities Cited

• Thompson v. State, 589 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)