GLENN RICHARDSON
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.
Postconviction review of a sentence based on Erlinger v. United States is improper because Erlinger was a direct-appeal case involving required jury findings on an element, not a postconviction sentencing case.
[1] Erlinger 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“Erlinger was a direct-appeal case—not a postconviction case like Ford's—and it involved required jury findings regarding an element. Based on these fundamental distinctions, it is clear that Erlinger provides no support for vacating Ford's death sentences.”
Court's reasoning for affirming, citing Ford v. State
Glenn Richardson appealed from a circuit court decision in Miami-Dade County. The appeal involved postconviction review of Richardson's sentence.…
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 Appeal Of Death Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 6, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-0830 Lower Tribunal No. F91-30238A ________________
Glenn Richardson, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Zachary N. James, Judge.
Glenn Richardson, in proper person.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Lourdes B. Fernandez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, MILLER and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
Affirmed. See Ford v. State, 402 So. 3d 973, 981 (Fla. 2025) (“Erlinger[ v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024)] was a direct-appeal case—not a postconviction case like Ford's—and it involved required jury findings regarding an element. Based on these fundamental distinctions, it is clear that Erlinger provides no support for vacating Ford’s death sentences.”); Tanzi v. State, 407 So. 3d 385, 394–95 (Fla. 2025) (finding postconviction review of defendant’s sentence based on Erlinger was improper); Lewis v. State, No. 3D25-0396, 2025 WL 1819465, at *1 (Fla. 3d DCA July 2, 2025) (same).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (U.S. 2024)
- Ford v. State, 402 So. 3d 973 (Fla. 2025)
- Tanzi v. State, 407 So. 3d 385 (Fla. 2025)