Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with multiple crimes involving sex acts with minors. He was found guilty of two of the charges and subsequently sentenced. The defendant then filed an appeal, arguing in part that the trial court judge improperly relied upon conduct the defendant was found not guilty of committing to determine an appropriate sentence. The appellate court found in favor of the defendant and remanded the case for a new sentence.

Factors Weighed in Determining a Sentence

Under Florida law, a judge may not rely on or consider conduct for which a defendant was acquitted when assessing what sentence to issue. In other words, it is well-established law that when the record demonstrates that the trial court relied upon previous acquittals in determining an appropriate sentence, the State bears the burden of proving that the judge’s consideration of the prior acquittals played no part in the assessment of a sentence.

In the subject case, during the sentencing hearing, the judge made numerous comments regarding the crimes for which the defendant was charged but found not guilty of committing. Specifically, he commented on the crimes of sexual battery and showing obscene materials to minors multiple times. Then, immediately after making the comments, the judge sentenced the defendant to two life sentences that were to run concurrently.

Based on the trial judge’s remarks immediately prior to issuing the sentence, the appellate court found that the record supported the finding that the trial judge improperly considered charges for which the defendant was not convicted in setting forth the sentence. Further, the appellate court noted that the State had not provided any evidence that would persuade the court that the trial judge did not consider the defendant’s acquittals during sentencing. As such, the court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing.

Meet with a Trusted Clearwater Attorney

If you live in Clearwater and are accused of engaging in unlawful sex acts, it is critical to retain an attorney who will fight vigorously to protect your rights. Attorney William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a trusted Clearwater sex crime defense attorney who proudly helps criminal defendants fight for a just outcome, and if you retain his services, he will advocate tirelessly on your behalf. You can reach Mr. Hanlon by calling 727-897-5413 or via the form online to schedule a free and confidential meeting.

The post Florida Court Discusses Factors a Court May Consider in Issuing Sentences appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the defendant, who was 52-years-old, became involved in a sexual relationship with the victim, who was his 17-year-old niece. The defendant’s behavior became aggressive, and he began threatening to accuse the victim’s brother of a crime if she ended their relationship. The victim ultimately told her mother about her involvement with the defendant, and the defendant was arrested and charged with multiple crimes involving sex with a minor.

It is reported that the defendant pleaded no contest to the charges. During the sentencing hearing, the prosecution presented testimony regarding the defendant’s grooming of the victim and an impact statement from the victim. The trial court also stated that the case appeared to be a classic representation of grooming. The court imposed a downward departure from the minimum sentence of 264 months in prison, however, and only imposed a five-year sentence, based on a finding that the victim was a willing participant. The State appealed, arguing the court erred in granting a downward departure.

Grounds for a Downward Departure of a Sentence in a Sex Crime Case

In Florida, a court weighing whether to impose a downward departure sentence must engage in a two-part process to determine if a reduced sentence is appropriate. First, the court must determine whether there is both a legal ground for the departure and adequate evidence in support of the ground for departure.  The facts supporting the ground for the departure must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence to be considered adequate. The court must only engage in the second step, determining whether it should depart from the guidelines, if the first step is met. In the second step, the court must evaluate the totality of the circumstances in the case.

The Florida Statutes further provide that a downward departure from a minimum sentence in a felony case is prohibited unless there are circumstances that warrant a departure, such as evidence that the victim was the initiator or willing participant of an incident. In the subject case, the appellate court noted that the evidence of record showed that the defendant made advances towards the victim despite her rejections, gave her alcohol and professed his love for her, and otherwise coerced her into engaging in a sexual relationship. Thus, the appellate court found that the trial court erred in deeming her a willful participant and reversed the sentence.

Speak to a Skillful Clearwater Defense Attorney

If you are a resident of Clearwater currently faced with charges that you committed a sex crime, it is in your best interest to speak to an attorney regarding what evidence the State may introduce against you. Attorney William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a skillful Clearwater sex crime defense attorney with the knowledge and experience needed to help you strive for the best outcome available under the facts of your case. You can reach Mr. Hanlon through the form online or at 727-897-5413 to set up a confidential and free meeting.

The post Florida Court Discusses Downward Departure Sentences appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with committing multiple sex crimes against his adopted son, including sexual battery by a person in a position of familial authority and lascivious or lewd molestation of a child. Before the trial, the State produced two psychological assessments of the victim, that indicated issues with regards to his state of mind, credibility, and bias. The State then filed a motion for a protective order, barring the victim’s treating psychologists from testifying at trial. The trial court granted the order. During the trial, the State largely relied on the victim’s testimony regarding the alleged abuse. A jury found the defendant guilty of all charges, after which he appealed, arguing in part that the trial court erred in refusing to permit the defendant to introduce evidence from the victim’s treating psychologists.

Sixth Amendment Right to Confront Accusers

Under Florida law, the psychotherapist-patient privilege protects a person’s communications and records pertaining to mental health treatment from disclosure. While the law specifically provides for a waiver of the privilege in certain circumstances, none of them were present in this case. As such, the court analyzed whether the defendant was permitted to overcome the privilege to cross-examine the victim with information pertaining to his credibility and bias.

The appellate court noted that the trial court reviewed the documents in question in the subject case and found them to be relevant to the issues of the victim’s credibility and bias. Further, the court stated that under Florida law, credibility may be attacked by demonstrating that a witness is biased, or that a witness’s ability to recall an event is impaired. In sum, the court found that the information the defendant requested to use was limited to the material and relevant issue of whether the victim was biased or credible. Thus, the court ruled that the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his witness required the disclosure of otherwise privileged records.

The court, therefore, vacated the defendant’s conviction and remanded the case for a new trial.

Speak with an Experienced Sex Crime Defense Attorney

If you were charged with child molestation or another sex crime in Clearwater, it is critical to engage a lawyer who will work to provide you with the best chance of a favorable result under the facts of your case. Attorney William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a seasoned Clearwater sex crime defense attorney who will work diligently to help you protect your interests. You can contact Mr. Hanlon by calling 727-897-5413 or via the online form to schedule a free and confidential meeting.

The post Court Assesses Patient-Therapist Privilege in Florida Sex Crime Cases appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Facts Regarding the Alleged Offenses and Trial

It is reported that the defendant, who was 40 years old, picked up the victim, who was 16 years old while she was walking on the side of the road, and took her to his residence. The defendant then offered the victim Dilaudid, which they both injected, after which they had intercourse. The victim died later that evening from an accidental overdose. An autopsy revealed she had numerous drugs in her system, including a small amount of Dilaudid. It was not clear whether the Dilaudid contributed to her death. The defendant was charged with unlawful sexual acts with a person 16 or 17 years old and delivering controlled substances to a person under 18. He was convicted on both counts.

It is alleged that during the sentencing hearing, the judge stated that he was sure the State would have charged the defendant with homicide if the State had sufficient facts to do so. He also stated that the defendant was the main cause of the victim’s death. The defendant was subsequently sentenced to 13-year sentences, to be served consecutively, for each offense. The defendant appealed, arguing the trial court considered impermissible factors in issuing a sentence.

Impermissible Sentencing Factors

Under Florida law, if the court considers impermissible factors in sentencing a defendant, it violates the defendant’s constitutional rights and requires the sentence to be reversed and the case to be remanded for resentencing. The State bears the burden of proving from the evidence of record that the trial court did not evaluate impermissible factors in issuing a sentence. Further, the appellate court assessing the matter must analyze the record to evaluate whether a sentence was at least partially the result of impermissible factors.

While a trial court can consider a defendant’s prior record and the facts surrounding the current charge, it cannot consider charges that were dismissed or pending, or subsequent misconduct, in sentencing a defendant. In the subject case, the appellate court found that upon a review of the record, it could not conclude that the trial court did not consider an uncharged homicide offense to some extent when it sentenced the defendant. Thus, the court reversed the sentence.

Meet with a Trusted Criminal Defense Attorney

Criminal defendants have rights during all stages of proceedings, including the right to a fair sentence. If you are charged with a sex offense, it is prudent to meet with a trusted Clearwater sex crime attorney to assess your rights and available defenses.  Attorney William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a zealous criminal defense attorney who will work diligently to help you seek the best outcome available under the facts of your case. You can contact Mr. Hanlon through the form online or at 727-897-5413 to schedule a confidential and free conference regarding your charges.

The post Florida Court Explains Impermissible Sentencing Factors appeared first on Clearwater Criminal Lawyer Blog.