COREY L. BROWN, JR., 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.
The appellate court affirmed a juvenile offender's conviction for second-degree murder but remanded the case because the trial court failed to make required written findings regarding the offender's eligibility for sentence review. This decision highlights the procedural requirements for sentence review for certain juvenile offenders in Florida.
Yes, the trial court erred by failing to make the required written findings regarding Brown's entitlement to sentence review. Therefore, the case must be remanded for the trial court to make these findings.
[1] A trial court's failure to make required written findings regarding a defendant's entitlement to sentence review necessitates a remand for the trial court to make those f…
[2] A defendant convicted of an offense reclassified as a life felony, committed before the age of eighteen, is eligible for sentence review under section 775.082(3)(a)(5), F…
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 we agree with Brown that the trial court failed to make written findings regarding his entitlement to a sentence review as now required by section 775.082(3)(a)(5)(c), Florida Statutes (2014), we remand for the trial court to make those findings.”
Establishes the court's agreement with the appellant on a specific procedural error and the resulting action.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCorey L. Brown, Jr., a juvenile, was convicted of second-degree murder with a firearm and sentenced to forty years in prison with a twenty-five-year m…
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 Second Degree Murder With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
Corey L. Brown, Jr., appeals his judgment and sentence for second-degree murder with a firearm, an offense he committed as a juvenile. After a jury found him guilty, the trial court sentenced Brown to forty years’ prison with a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum term based on the jury’s finding that he caused the victim’s death by discharging a firearm during the offense. See § 775.087(2)(a)(3), Fla. Stat. (2013). We find merit in only one of the issues raised in this appeal and affirm Brown’s conviction without further comment. We also conclude that the trial court conducted an appropriate sentencing hearing in accordance with section 921.1401, Florida Statutes (2014), and thus affirm the trial court’s decision to sentence Brown to forty years’ prison. See, e.g., Young v. State, 219 So.3d 206, 209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). Because we agree with Brown that the trial court failed to make written findings regarding his entitlement to a sentence review as now required by section 775.082(3)(a)(5)(c), Florida Statutes (2014), we remand for the trial court to make those findings.
Brown preserved this issue by raising it in a motion to correct sentencing error that was deemed denied after it had not been ruled on within sixty days. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B). Because Brown was convicted under section 782.04(2), Florida Statutes (2013), of an offense that was reclassified as a life felony pursuant to section 775.087(l)(a) which he committed before he was eighteen, he is eligible for sentence review under section 775.082(3)(a)(5). However, the record contains no written findings that Brown is entitled to sentence review as required by section 775.082(3)(a)(5)(c). Accordingly, we must remand for the trial court to make the necessary written findings regarding Brown’s entitlement to sentence review. See Cook v. State, 225 So.3d 268, 269 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); Cutts v. State, 225 So.3d 244, 245-46 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); see also Hawkins v. State, 219 So.3d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
Affirmed and remanded with directions.
KELLY and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 283 So. 3d 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…ged a firearm causing great bodily harm. In his direct appeal, this court affirmed Mr. Brown's conviction without comment, remanding only for the trial court to make written findings regarding his entitlement to a sentence review. Brown v. State, 235 So. 3d 971, 972 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). In Ground I of Mr. Brown's postconviction motion, he contended that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to prevent the introduction of a prejudicial photograph at trial. Specifically, he asserted that even though…
Authorities Cited
- Kendall Young v. State, 219 So. 3d 206 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
- Cook v. State, 225 So. 3d 268 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Cutts v. State, 225 So. 3d 244 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Hawkins v. State, 219 So. 3d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)