Florida courts are bound by certain guidelines when issuing penalties in criminal matters. For example, they can only consider certain factors when determining penalties. As demonstrated in a recent Florida sex crime case, if they deviate from those factors, the defendant may have grounds for vacating their sentence. If you are charged with a sex crime, you should consult a Tampa sex crime defense attorney to help you protect your rights at every stage of the legal process.
History of the Case
It is alleged that the defendant entered a no-contest plea to a series of charges spanning six pending felony cases. These charges reportedly included robbery with a firearm, aggravated battery with a firearm, burglary, fleeing or attempting to elude law enforcement, tampering with a witness (a life felony), and multiple drug offenses. As part of the plea agreement, the State agreed to dismiss some charges and two entire cases. In return, the defendant was to receive no more than 15 years in prison, subject to possible youthful offender treatment.
Reportedly, during the sentencing hearing, witnesses presented testimony about dropped and uncharged offenses involving the defendant. One witness described the circumstances of a robbery case that was dismissed as part of the plea agreement. Another described an alleged incident of tampering with a witness in a homicide investigation despite the defendant not being charged in that matter. The sentencing judge cited these incidents, along with other dropped charges, when imposing a 15-year sentence followed by three years of probation. Following sentencing, the defendant moved to withdraw his plea, arguing that the trial court improperly relied on these impermissible factors. The motion was denied without a hearing, and the defendant appealed.
Permissible Considerations During Sentencing
On appeal, the court reviewed the case and concluded that the trial court improperly considered impermissible sentencing factors. Under Florida law and the U.S. Constitution, sentencing courts may evaluate the circumstances surrounding a defendant’s primary offense and prior record but are prohibited from relying on dismissed or uncharged allegations. Doing so violates the defendant’s due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The court found that the trial judge explicitly referenced a dismissed robbery charge during sentencing, even noting specific details about the alleged incident, such as the weapon type and its location. The judge also appeared to weigh allegations of tampering and other uncharged conduct.
The court emphasized that any mention of dismissed charges must be incidental and not a basis for sentencing decisions. Here, the trial court’s extensive discussion of these allegations demonstrated that they influenced the sentence. Because the State could not prove that these impermissible considerations did not affect the outcome, the appellate court vacated the sentence and remanded the case for resentencing before a different judge.
In making its ruling, the court relied on that affirmed that relying on pending or dismissed charges effectively denies defendants their constitutional right to due process. The court concluded that allowing such practices creates a substantial risk of imposing punishment based on unproven or speculative misconduct.
Speak with a Trusted Tampa Sex Crime Defense Attorney Today
Improper reliance on dismissed or uncharged allegations can undermine a defendant’s right to a fair sentence and result in costly appeals and retrials. If you are faced with sex crime charges, it is smart to speak to an attorney about your options. The trusted Tampa sex crime attorneys of Hanlon Law can advise you of your rights and help you seek a just result. You can call us at 813-228-7095 or use our online form to schedule a consultation.