JESUS DAVILA
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A judge is not constitutionally or statutorily required to articulate reasons for imposing a sentence that falls between the statutory minimum and maximum.
[1] A trial judge is not required by constitutional or statutory provision to articulate reasons for imposing a sentence that falls within the statutory minimum and maximum r…
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“[N]o provision of the constitution or statute requires a judge to articulate the reasons for not giving the statutory minimum sentence when the sentence falls between the statutory minimum and maximum”
From Taylor v. State, 253 So. 3d 631, 632 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), cited as controlling authority
Jesus Davila was convicted in the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County, and received a sentence within the statutory ran…
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 Sentencing Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
JESUS DAVILA, Appellant,
V.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2025-1307
[May 20, 2026]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Barbara Duffy, Judge; L.T. Case No. 062022CF010413A88810.
Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender, and Paul Edward Petillo, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Melynda Layne Melear, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Guzman v. State, 350 So. 3d 72, 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022), rev. denied, No. SC2022-1597, 2023 WL 3830251 (Fla. June 6, 2023), cert. denied sub nom. Guzman v. Florida, 144 S. Ct. 2595 (2024); Taylor v. State, 253 So. 3d 631, 632 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (holding that “[n]o provision of the constitution or statute requires a judge to articulate the reasons for not giving the statutory minimum sentence when the sentence falls between the statutory minimum and maximum”).
GROSS, MAY and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Guzman v. State, 350 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
- Taylor v. State, 253 So. 3d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)