In federal criminal sentencing, enhancements under the United States Sentencing Guidelines can significantly increase a defendant’s prison term, especially when firearms are involved in drug-related offenses. For example, courts may impose an enhancement if they find a defendant possessed a firearm “in connection with” another felony offense. As discussed in a recent Florida ruling, this guideline provision is not ambiguous and does not require courts to defer to agency commentary unless specific criteria are met. If you are facing federal charges involving firearms or drugs, a knowledgeable Sarasota criminal defense attorney can help you understand what steps you can take to protect your rights.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the defendant pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(8). The conviction stemmed from an August 2022 incident in Fort Myers, Florida, where detectives observed the defendant engaging in suspected hand-to-hand drug transactions while wearing a cross-body bag. After following the vehicle he entered, officers conducted a traffic stop and searched the car.

It is alleged that during the search, law enforcement officers discovered a firearm and ammunition inside the cross-body bag the defendant had been seen wearing. They also recovered a separate bag in the backseat containing approximately 15 grams of fentanyl and other controlled substances. A presentence investigation report (PSI) recommended a four-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), asserting that the firearm was possessed “in connection with” a drug trafficking offense.

The post Florida Court Discusses Sentencing Enhancements appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

In federal criminal cases, motions for compassionate release require courts to assess whether extraordinary and compelling reasons justify modifying a defendant’s sentence. These motions are governed by a narrow legal framework, and defendants bear the burden of proving their eligibility. Recently, a Florida court examined these principles in a case where the defendant sought compassionate release based on health conditions and changes in sentencing law. If you are navigating federal sentencing issues or seeking post-conviction relief, consulting an experienced Sarasota criminal defense attorney is crucial to understanding your options.

Factual and Procedural Background

The post Florida Court Examines Evidence in Support of a Request for Compassionate Release appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the defendant faced convictions for two counts of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon and one count of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The charges stemmed from an altercation where the defendant allegedly indiscriminately fired shots into a crowd, injuring multiple individuals.

Reportedly, witness testimony during the trial implicated the defendant as the perpetrator of the shooting. He was subsequently convicted by a jury and sentenced to 36 years in prison for each aggravated battery conviction and 36 years with a 20-year mandatory minimum for aggravated assault. The defendant appealed, challenging multiple aspects of his convictions and sentences, including the admission of certain evidence, jury instructions, and the legality of his sentences.

Grounds for Vacating Illegal Sentences

On appeal, the court upheld the trial court’s decision on issues such as the admission of witness testimony and the denial of a competency hearing. Further, regarding the reclassification of the aggravated battery convictions, the court determined that the trial court properly reclassified them as first-degree felonies, as the aggravated battery was independently established by the showing of great bodily harm, and the firearm was not an essential element of the offense.

The court reversed the trial court’s rulings on the legality of the defendant’s sentences, however.

Notably, the court found that the defendant’s sentence for aggravated battery exceeded the statutory maximum of 30 years and, therefore, warranted reversal. Additionally, the court determined that the defendant’s sentence for aggravated assault was illegal because it was based on a mandatory minimum that no longer applied under Florida law.

The court also noted a miscalculation in the defendant’s scoresheet, which required resentencing. Furthermore, the court found that a written no-contact order imposed by the trial court was invalid because it was not orally pronounced at sentencing, thus requiring correction. As a result, the court affirmed the trial court ruling in part, reversed in part, and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with its rulings.

Meet with a Dedicated Sarasota Criminal Defense Attorney

Although courts can sentence criminal defendants convicted of violent crimes as they see fit, they must comply with the statutory guidelines, and if they do not, the sentences they hand down may be illegal. If you are accused of a violent offense, it is wise to meet with an attorney to determine your possible defenses. The dedicated Sarasota violent crime defense lawyers of Hanlon Law can assess your case and help you to seek the best legal result available. You can contact Hanlon Law by calling 941-462-1789 or using the form online to arrange a meeting.

The post Court Explains Grounds for Vacating Illegal Sentences in Florida Criminal Matters appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

In Florida, when sentencing a person convicted of a crime, the courts will generally rely on statutory guidelines. The courts have the discretion to deviate from the guidelines, however, if the party seeking an upward or downward sentence demonstrates that a departure is warranted. In a recent opinion issued in a Florida case in which the defendant was convicted of multiple crimes following a deadly accident, the court discussed when a downward departure sentence is appropriate. If you are charged with manslaughter or any other crime following an accident, it is in your best interest to talk to a Sarasota criminal defense attorney about your rights.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the defendant was charged with manslaughter and numerous other crimes after she was involved in a fatal car accident. A jury ultimately found her guilty of driving without a license causing serious bodily injury or death. She moved for a downward departure sentence, arguing that she was not the proximate cause of death as the other driver caused the accident. The trial court denied her motion, however, stating that it did not have the discretion to issue a downward departure sentence based on comparative liability for the injuries. Consequently, the defendant was sentenced to the minimum scoresheet of approximately 15 years in prison. She appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in concluding that it was prohibited from considering her comparative fault as a potential basis for a downward departure sentence.

Determining Whether a Downward Departure Sentence is Appropriate

The court explains that determining the appropriateness of a downward departure sentence involves a two-step process. First, the court must ascertain whether there is a valid legal ground for the departure, as set forth in a statute or case law, and supported by facts proven by a preponderance of the evidence. Second, if a valid legal ground exists, the court must determine whether the departure is the best sentencing option by evaluating the totality of the circumstances.

The post Court Discusses Downward Departure Sentences in Florida Criminal Cases appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Procedural Background

Allegedly, the defendant was charged with manslaughter and aggravated assault. A jury convicted him following a trial, and the jury explicitly found that he discharged a gun when he committed the crimes. The trial court then issued a sentence of twenty years in prison for the aggravated assault count and thirty years for the manslaughter count, which were the statutory minimums. The court relied on the jury’s findings in issuing the sentences.

It is reported that the defendant then appealed, arguing that the sentence for his aggravated assault conviction was illegal. He also filed a motion arguing that because a firearm was an essential element of both crimes, his convictions were improperly reclassified, and therefore, his sentences exceeded the statutory limit.

Illegal Sentences Under Florida Law

The court upheld the defendant’s sentence on appeal. The court explained that a trial court can correct illegal sentences at any time, but such relief may only be granted when the records demonstrate a prima facie entitlement to such relief. Further, motions to correct illegal sentences may be resolved as a matter of law without the need for an evidentiary hearing.

The court noted that the Florida Supreme Court set forth a narrow definition for what constitutes an illegal sentence. Namely, it is one that imposes a penalty or punishment that no judge bound by the entire body of laws and sentencing statutes could impose under any set of facts. Illegal sentences include those that clearly fail to abide by constitutional or statutory limits.

In the subject action, the court stated that the defendant correctly asserted that aggravated assault was not subject to reclassification because a firearm was an essential element of aggravated assault. Reclassification was not the court’s basis for imposing the twenty-year sentence for aggravated assault, however. Rather, Florida Statutes obligate trial courts to impose mandatory minimums for firearm crimes. In other words, once the court learned that the defendant discharged a firearm, it was required to impose a twenty-year sentence. Thus, the sentence was not illegal, and the court affirmed the trial court ruling.

Talk to a Dedicated Sarasota Criminal Defense Attorney

Convictions for violent crimes typically carry substantial penalties, but simply because a person has been charged with a crime does not mean that they will be found guilty. If you are accused of a violent offense, it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney as soon as possible. The dedicated Sarasota criminal defense lawyers of Hanlon Law can assess the circumstances surrounding your arrest and help you to seek the best legal result possible under the facts of your case. You can contact Hanlon Law via the online form or by calling 941-462-1789 to set up a conference.

The post Court Discusses Illegal Sentences Under Florida Law appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the defendant was charged with aggravated child abuse. He entered into a plea agreement with the State and was sentenced to probation for 36 months. Subsequently, the State alleged that the defendant violated his probation by committing two acts of sexual assault. The violation report listed the offenses as the sexual battery on a victim under twelve by a person eighteen years or older. A trial was held regarding the alleged charges.

Allegedly, at the end of the trial, prior to the jury’s decision, an evidentiary hearing was held on the alleged probation violation. The court revoked the defendant’s probation without allowing the defendant to speak and sentenced the defendant to five years of imprisonment. The defendant was subsequently found not guilty of sexual assault crimes. The jury submitted a note to the judge stated that they believed the defendant committed an illegal act, but the evidence was insufficient to prove the crime charged.

The defendant subsequently appealed his probation revocation, arguing that the affidavit regarding his violation was insufficient and that the trial court erred in denying him an opportunity to speak. The court affirmed the revocation but vacated the sentenced and remanded the case for resentencing.

Sufficiency of a Probation Violation Affidavit

Under Florida law, it is a fundamental error for a trial court to revoke probation based on grounds not alleged in the probation affidavit. A probation revocation hearing may be informal, however, and is not required to be as thorough as a criminal trial. Further, a court can revoke probation even if a defendant is not formally convicted of a crime.

In the subject case, the affidavit the court relied on upon revoking the defendant’s probation alleged that the defendant was arrested for sexual assault. The court conceded that the defendant was correct in arguing that sexual assault was not a crime under Florida law, but stated that the defendant had notice of the offenses he was charged with due to the violation report that was submitted with the affidavit. Thus, the court found that the defendant’s rights were not violated due to the lack of a specific affidavit.

A Defendant’s Right to Be Heard at a Probation Revocation Hearing

Conversely, the court noted that a trial court’s refusal to hear evidence and argument pertaining to a sentence constitutes a fundamental error and is a denial of due process. As the trial court judge stated his intention to impose the maximum sentence regardless of any argument, the court revoked the sentence and remanded for resentencing.

Speak with a Trusted Criminal Defense Attorney

If you live in Sarasota and are faced with charges of a sex crime, it is critical to speak with a trusted Sarasota sex crime defense attorney regarding your case and what defenses you may be able to argue. Attorney William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a seasoned criminal defense attorney with the knowledge and skills needed to help you seek a successful outcome. You can reach Mr. Hanlon through the form online or at 941-462-1789 to set up a meeting to discuss your charges.

The post Florida Court Discusses a Defendant’s Rights at a Probation Revocation Hearing appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Recently, a Florida appellate court scrutinized whether a sentence of life in prison with judicial review after 25 years was cruel and unusual punishment, ultimately ruling that it was not. If you are charged with a violent crime in Sarasota, it is essential to retain a skillful Sarasota criminal defense attorney to assist you in formulating a defense.

The Defendant’s Conviction and Sentence

Reportedly, the defendant was convicted of first-degree murder in 1985, for a crime he committed when he was a juvenile. He was first sentenced to life in prison with a possibility of parole after twenty-five years. In 2016, he moved for post-conviction relief in the form of resentencing, arguing that his sentence violated the Eighth Amendment. Following a hearing, he was resentenced to life in prison with judicial review after twenty-five years. The defendant subsequently appealed the new sentence. On appeal, the court affirmed.

Life Sentences for Juvenile Offenders

In Miller v. Alabama, the United States Supreme Court established that imposing a sentence of life in prison without a possibility of parole on a juvenile homicide offender violates the Eighth Amendment. Subsequent to Miller, the Florida courts have ruled that sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole in a homicide case violate the Eighth Amendment. The court noted, however, that Miller did not impose an absolute bar on life sentences, but required the court to consider the juvenile defendant’s youth before imposing a sentence of life in prison without parole. Further, the Florida courts have held that a life sentence without the chance of parole is reserved for rare instances, in which the crime reflects the juvenile defendant is irreparably corrupted.

Here, the court found that the defendant’s resentencing in accordance with chapter 2014-220 of the laws of Florida is the correct remedy for a sentence that violates Miller.  The court stated that defendant’s new sentence was not a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole or a chance for release based on rehabilitation, which placed the sentence out of the bounds of the Miller ruling. As such, the court affirmed the defendant’s sentence.

Meet with an Experienced Sarasota Criminal Defense Attorney About Your Case

If you are a resident of Sarasota and are charged with homicide or another violent crime, you should meet with an experienced Sarasota criminal defense attorney to develop a strategy to defend against the charges you face. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a seasoned Sarasota violent crimes defense attorney who will work diligently on your behalf in the pursuit of a successful result. You can reach Mr. Hanlon at 727-897-5413 or through the form online to set up a free and confidential meeting.

More blog posts:

Florida Court Overturns Sentence due to Scoresheet Error, February 5, 2019, 2018, Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog

The post Florida Court Rules a Sentence of Life Imprisonment with Judicial Review After 25 Years is Not Unconstitutional appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

As set forth in a case recently decided by a Florida appellate court, however, not all probation violations are grounds for revocation. If you live in Sarasota and are facing criminal charges, it is prudent to consult a seasoned Sarasota criminal defense attorney to assist you in formulating a defense.

Terms of the Defendant’s Probation

The defendant was convicted of welfare fraud and sentenced to probation. There were several conditions to her probation, including the conditions that she “will pay” court costs and that she “may perform” community service in lieu of paying court costs. The defendant did not pay the court costs or perform community service. Consequently, the State moved for a revocation of probation. During the revocation proceeding, the court did not assess whether the defendant had the ability to pay the court costs, but found that the defendant had the ability to perform community service. Thus, the court revoked her probation. The defendant then appealed the revocation of her probation.

Grounds for Revocation of Probation

Under Florida law, to revoke probation a trial court must find that a defendant substantially violated a condition of probation. Further, it must be shown that the violation was willful. In cases where the alleged violation is the failure to pay a monetary obligation, to show the defendant’s failure to pay was willful, the court must first find that the defendant possessed the ability to pay. In the subject case, as the trial court declined to make a determination as to the defendant’s ability to pay, the court could not affirm the revocation of probation due to the failure to pay court costs.

The court also declined to affirm the revocation due to the defendant’s failure to perform community service. The court stated that while the language stating the defendant “will” pay court costs meant that such payment was required, the language stating she “may” perform community service in lieu of payment was permissive. While the defendant had the alternative to perform community service, she chose not to do so. As such, the court found that the obligation to pay court costs remained in place, and the defendant’s probation could not be revoked unless the trial court found that she had the ability to pay. Therefore, the court reversed the revocation of probation and remanded the case to determine the defendant’s ability to pay court costs.

Confer with an Experienced Sarasota Criminal Defense Attorney Regarding your Case

If you face criminal charges in Sarasota, you should confer with an experienced Sarasota criminal defense attorney regarding the facts of your case and your available defenses. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a knowledgeable Sarasota criminal defense attorney who will work diligently on your behalf to help you pursue a successful result under the circumstances. Mr. Hanlon can be reached at 727-897-5413 or through the online form to set up a confidential and free conference.

The post Florida Court Reverses Revocation of Probation for Failure to Pay Court Costs appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

This was illustrated recently in a case heard by a Florida appellate court, in which the court reversed the defendant’s sentenced due to a scoresheet error.  If you live in Sarasota and are currently facing criminal charges, you should meet with an experienced Sarasota crime defense attorney to formulate a plan for your defense.

Facts Surrounding the Defendant’s Arrest

Reportedly, the defendant was on probation for a drug charge when he was charged with armed kidnapping and robbery with a weapon. He entered a no contest plea to violating his probation, and the State offered a factual basis for his plea. The state alleged that three men entered a cell phone store, bound one of the employee’s arms behind her back, and stoles several phones. Prior to leaving, one of the men sprayed the employee in the face with pepper spray. A short time thereafter, a similar robbery occurred at a different cell phone store. The second store had surveillance video, which ultimately led to the defendant’s arrest. The defendant stipulated to the facts introduced by the State but argued that he played a lesser role in the crimes.

It is alleged that the sentencing scoresheet determined the defendant’s lowest permitted sentence to be approximately 10.2 years. The defendant filed a motion for a downward departure, arguing he did not have a weapon during the robberies and was a minor actor in committing the crimes. The court denied the motion and sentenced the defendant to fifteen years in prison. The defendant then filed a motion for reconsideration and a motion to correct a sentencing error, arguing the sentencing scoresheet contained errors. The defendant’s motion was denied, after which he appealed.

Scoresheet Errors

Kidnapping is a level 9 offense, as well as a felony. Under Florida law, felonies can be reclassified when a weapon is used during the commission of the crime. Specifically, they can be ranked one level higher than the ranking of the offense committed. When a defendant is charged with a felony that involves the use of a weapon, however, this reclassification is not permitted unless there is evidence that the defendant had actual possession of a weapon during the crime. In the subject case, the State conceded the defendant did not have a weapon during the commission of the crime. As such, the classification of the kidnapping as a level 10 offense was improper.

The defendant then argued that the record did not support the assessment of injury points on the sentencing scoresheet. The court disagreed, finding that the cell phone store employee’s testimony that she was sprayed with pepper spray, which is a potentially damaging chemical weapon was sufficient to show a slight victim injury. Ultimately, the court concluded the State could not show the same sentence would have been imposed absent the additional points that were assessed for the kidnapping offense. As such, the court reversed the defendant’s sentence and remanded for resentencing.

Retain an Experienced Sarasota Criminal Defense Attorney Today

If you are a Sarasota resident charged with a crime, it is prudent to meet with an experienced criminal defense attorney to discuss the charges you face and what evidence the State may introduce against you at trial. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a skilled Sarasota criminal defense attorney who will work diligently to help you seek a successful outcome under the facts of your case. You can reach Mr. Hanlon at 727-897-5413 or through the online form to schedule a consultation.

The post Florida Court Overturns Sentence due to Scoresheet Error appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.