DETARSHA C. BRADLEY
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2019-04-16
No. 17-5463
Prescott, Mullins, Bear
267 So. 3d 1103 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2019) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 303 So. 3d 1018
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

Appellant was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon arising from a single criminal episode with one victim. Following remand under prior precedent to allow the trial court to exercise discretion, the trial court re-imposed consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences. The appellate court reversed and remanded again, finding that under the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Miller v. State, consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences are permissible only when multiple victims or multiple injuries exist.


Holding

Consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences are not permissible for single-episode crimes unless there are either multiple victims or multiple injuries. Because appellant's conduct involved only one victim and one injury, the sentences must be concurrent.


Headnotes

[1] Consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences imposed for a single-episode crime may be imposed only when the crime involves either multiple victims or multiple injuries to a s…

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

Appellant committed aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in a single criminal episode involving one victim during which…

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.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, resulting from one criminal episode involving one victim, in which three or four shots were fired. The trial court imposed consecutive minimummandatory sentences under section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (10-20-Life); and Appellant challenged that aspect of his sentence on appeal. Pursuant to Walton v. State, 208 So. 3d 60 (Fla. 2016), and Williams v. State, 186 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2016), we remanded for the trial court to exercise its discretion as to whether Appellant's minimum-mandatory sentences should be concurrent or consecutive. Bradley v. State, 223 So. 3d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). The trial court re-entered consecutive sentences. After that hearing and while this appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court decided Miller v. State, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S426, 2018 WL 4784069 (Fla. Oct. 4, 2018). In that case, the supreme court clarified its post-Williams cases as holding that consecutive sentences are permissible for single-episode crimes only when there are either multiple victims or multiple injuries—neither of which was the case here. Miller, 2018 WL 4784069 at *2. We followed that precedent in Fleming v. State, 260 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019), remanding for resentencing with concurrent minimum-mandatory sentences; and we do so again now.

REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.

ROWE, OSTERHAUS, and KELSEY, JJ., concur. Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender; and Barbara J. Busharis, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General; Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorney General; and Tabitha Herrera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw