BRENT SOWELL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a mandatory three-year minimum sentence for aggravated assault committed with a firearm, rejecting challenges based on due process, equal protection, and separation of powers.
A mandatory three-year minimum sentence for aggravated assault with a firearm is constitutional and not cruel and unusual punishment.
[1] A mandatory minimum sentence established by the legislature and not facially cruel and unusual is constitutional when challenged on due process, equal protection, or sepa…
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 intelligenceSowell was convicted of aggravated assault using a shotgun and sentenced to three years imprisonment under the mandatory minimum provision of Florida …
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 Mandatory Minimum Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
HATCHETT, Justice.
Our jurisdiction in this case is based upon Article V, Section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution, vesting jurisdiction in this Court where the constitutionality of a state statute is initially and directly passed upon.
The appellant was convicted of aggravated assault, by the use of a shotgun, under Section 784.04, Florida Statutes, and sentenced to three years imprisonment under the mandatory three-year provision of Section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes. We are asked to determine whether Section 775.-087(2), Florida Statutes, which provides that a person convicted of aggravated assault (Section 784.04, Florida Statutes) through the use of a firearm must be sentenced to a minimum term of three years’ imprisonment, and serve all three years of the sentence before being eligible for parole, is constitutional.
This Court has long held, and now reaffirms its holding, that where a sentence is one that has been established by the legislature and is not on its face cruel and unusual, it will be sustained when attacked on grounds of due process, equal protection, or separation of power theories. O’Donnell v. State, 326 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1975); Owens v. State, 316 So. 2d 537 (Fla.1975); Owens v. State, 300 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), appeal dismissed, 305 So. 2d 203 (Fla.1974), and Dorminey v. State, 314 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1975). We do not find the mandatory three-year sentence provision to be cruel or unusual.
Accordingly, we hold that Section 775.-087(2), Florida Statutes, is constitutional, and the appellant’s conviction is affirmed.
OVERTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and KARL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Lightbourne v. State, 438 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1983)…lly, the determination of maximum and minimum penalties is a matter for the legislature. Also, when a statutory sentence is not cruel and unusual on its face it will be upheld against an attack based on separation of powers grounds. Sowell v. State, 342 So. 2d 969 (Fla.1977). Second, the defendant attacks the constitutionality of section 921.141, arguing that the aggravating and mitigating circumstances contained in the statute are im-permissibly vague and overbroad. This Court has ruled on numerous occasion…
-
Speed v. State, 732 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…s have been uniformly rejected by courts in this state. See, e.g., Lightbourne v. State, 438 So. 2d [*20] 380 (Fla.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1051, 104 S.Ct. 1330, 79 L.Ed.2d 725 (1984); Scott v. State, 369 So. 2d 330 (Fla.1979); Sowell v. State, 342 So. 2d 969 (Fla.1977). Accordingly, we reject the argument that the Act is unconstitutional because it requires the trial court to impose a mandatory minimum sentence. We find no merit in the other issue raised by Speed in respect to the sufficiency of the ev…
-
State v. Champe, 373 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 1978)…ns have upheld the power of the state to impose restitution as a sentence for crime, when authorized by statute. See generally 24B C.J.S. Criminal Law § 2007 (1962). .Amos v. Gunn, 84 Fla. 285, 364, 94 So. 615, 641 (1922). See also Sowell v. State, 342 So. 2d 969 (Fla.1977).…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. McHANEY, 314 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1975)
- Owens v. State, 316 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1975)
- O'Donnell v. State, 326 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1975)
- Houston Owens v. State, 300 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Monroe v. State, 305 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1974)