FREDDIE L. WADE, 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.
Court reversed juvenile's life sentence for second-degree murder and remanded for resentencing because trial court failed to consider individualized juvenile factors required by section 921.1401, Florida Statutes.
A trial court must consider individualized juvenile factors under section 921.1401, Florida Statutes, when sentencing a juvenile to life imprisonment for second-degree murder.
[1] Trial courts must consider individualized juvenile factors under section 921.1401, Florida Statutes, when sentencing a juvenile defendant to life imprisonment.
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 intelligenceFreddie L. Wade, a juvenile, was convicted of second-degree murder following a jury trial and sentenced to life with a minimum-mandatory sentence due …
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 Juvenile Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant Freddie L. Wade was a juvenile . when he committed second-degree murder. Following a jury trial the court sentenced him to life, with life as a minimum-mandatory sentence due to discharge of the firearm causing death. Thereafter Appellant filed a timely rule 3.850 motion challenging this sentence as unconstitutional due to the trial court failing to consider his juvenile status when imposing the sentence. He also raises three claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
We reverse the appeal as to the claim asserting unconstitutionality of the life sentence and remand for the trial court to resentence Appellant pursuant to the individualized factors under section 921.1401, Florida Statutes, which must be considered when sentencing a juvenile, as explained in Landrum v. State, 192 So.3d 459 (Fla.2016). See also Carter v. State, 194 So.3d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). As the appellant filed an initial brief but failed to address any of the remaining claims, he has waived the right to have them considered in this appeal. See Watson v. State, 975 So.2d 572, 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“Traditionally, when a defendant submits a brief in an appeal from a summary denial of a postconviction motion, this Court may review only those arguments raised and fully addressed in the brief.”).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED in part.
LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR,. JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Babichev v. Sec'y Fla. Dep't Of Corr. (Duval County) (M.D. Fla. 2021)…40 U.S. 1222 (2004). As such, in order to preserve an argument for review, an appellant must raise and fully address the argument in his brief on appeal, and if the appellant fails to do so, the claim will be considered to be waived. Wade v. State, 201 So. 3d 806, 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (per curiam). In this instance, Petitioner failed to present substantive arguments as to the circuit court’s rejection of his claims now presented in grounds 2A and 2E. Petitioner’s summary request that the appellate…
Authorities Cited
- Laisha L. Landrum v. State, 192 So. 3d 459 (Fla. 2016)
- Watson v. State, 975 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- State v. Davis, 194 So. 3d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
- Tywann Octavious Carter v. State, 194 So. 3d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)