STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
GERALD WEST

Fla. 4th DCA | 2019-01-09
No. 16-4252
Crawford Martin
262 So. 3d 818 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2019) Caution
Cited by 9 cases

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.


Holding

A defendant whose sentence does not preclude parole eligibility is not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, because such a sentence is not unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama or Graham v. Florida.


Headnotes

[1] When a defendant is eligible for parole, the sentence is not unconstitutional under Miller v. …

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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Gerald West was sentenced in a criminal matter and filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule 3.800. The trial court granted the…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The State appeals an order granting the defendant’s motion to correct an illegal sentence. We reverse. Because the defendant is eligible for parole, his sentence is not unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), or Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010). Franklin v. State, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla. Nov. 8, 2018). He is not therefore entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes.

In State v. Michel, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S298 (Fla. July 12, 2018), and Franklin, the Florida Supreme Court receded from Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2016). The defendant argues Michel does not create binding precedent because only three justices joined in Justice Polston’s opinion and Justice Lewis concurred only in the result. However, four justices joined the majority in Franklin, which recognized that Atwell is no longer good law and “improperly applied Graham and Miller.” Franklin, 43 Fla. L. Weekly at S556.

Reversed.

TAYLOR, DAMOORGIAN and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw