KOREY DER'RENARD GUNN
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.
Mr. Gunn appealed his robbery conviction and challenged his sentence. The court affirmed his conviction but reversed and remanded his sentence after finding the trial judge was predisposed to impose consecutive sentences before trial, violating the requirement of judicial impartiality.
The court held that the trial judge erred by having a predetermined, pretrial intention to sentence Mr. Gunn consecutively. The court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing before a different judge, as sentencing judges must be impartial and not predisposed to a particular sentencing outcome.
[1] A sentencing judge's predetermined intention to impose a particular sentencing structure, communicated to the parties before trial, violates the requirement of judicial i…
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“Given the fact that Defendant committed the robbery in this case while on probation, it was always the intent of this Court that Defendant serve his prison sentence in this case consecutively to his VOP prison sentences.”
Trial judge's own statement in the order rejecting defendant's motion to correct sentencing error, revealing the predisposed sentencing intention.
Mr. Gunn was convicted of robbery committed while on probation. The trial judge stated in writing that it was always his intent to sentence Gunn conse…
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 Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
July 16, 2019 PER CURIAM.
Mr. Gunn appeals his conviction for robbery, and challenges his sentence in two respects. We reject his new-trial argument and affirm his conviction, but reverse his sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge.
In an order rejecting Mr. Gunn’s motion to correct sentencing error, the trial judge wrote the following:
Given the fact that Defendant committed the robbery in this case while on probation, it was always the intent of this Court that Defendant serve his prison sentence in this case consecutively to his VOP prison sentences. This Court’s intent was known to the parties, including Defendant personally, prior to the trial in this case. Because this Court imposed the sentence that it intended to impose, Defendant’s claim is without merit.
Sentencing judges must be impartial and not predisposed to a particular sentencing outcome. Cromartie v. State, 70 So. 3d 559, 564 (Fla. 2011) (invalidating sentence entered under a judge’s stated policy of always rounding sentences up to the next whole year). Similarly in this case, the trial judge erred by having a predetermined, pretrial intention to sentence Mr. Gunn consecutively. We therefore vacate Mr. Gunn’s sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge.
REVERSED.
ROWE, BILBREY, 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 David A. Henson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General; and Julian E. Markham, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kierra Taylor v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Cromartie v. State, 70 So. 3d 559 (Fla. 2011)