RICHARD PAUL LAIRD, 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.
A defendant's conviction for escape under Florida Statutes § 944.40 is affirmed when sufficient evidence supports the conviction, jury instructions contain no error, and the sentence imposed falls within the legal maximum for the offense.
[1] An appellate court may affirm a conviction when sufficient evidence supports it and the sentence imposed does not exceed the statutory maximum for the offense, even if th…
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“Justice should be tempered with mercy and understanding. They appear to have been overlooked in this case.”
The majority acknowledged the harshness of the sentence given Laird's circumstances but stated it was legally permissible.
Laird was serving a 475-day burglary sentence at a work-release facility with a scheduled June 27, 1979 release date. After his furlough request to se…
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 Jury Instructions Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Laird was found guilty of “escape” in violation of section 944.40, Florida Statutes (1979), and the trial judge sentenced him to five years imprisonment. “Escape” is a second degree felony, for which a court may sentence a defendant to imprisonment for up to 15 years.1
Laird had been serving a 475 day sentence for burglary at the Orange County Court Alternative Center, and he was scheduled for release on June 27, 1979, approximately three months after his escape. He was notified that his eighty year old mother, who was living in Ohio, had suffered an accident and was not expected to live. Laird asked for a furlough to see his mother, but his request was denied. While on a weekend furlough within Orange County, Laird telephoned to check his mother’s progress and was told her condition was failing. He hitchhiked to Ohio, but his mother died before he arrived. Laird turned himself in to police in Ohio four months later. We are powerless to reverse or amend this judgment because there was sufficient evidence to uphold Laird’s conviction, no error occurred in jury instructions, and the sentence imposed was within the legal limits. McInnes v. State, 345 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). However, the harshness of the sentence, under the circumstances, deserves comment. Justice should be tempered with mercy and understanding. They appear to have been overlooked in this case.
AFFIRMED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., and SHARP, JJ., concur. COBB, J., concurs specially with opinion.
. § 775.082(3)(c), Fla.Stat. (1979).
COBB, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur in the result reached by the majority, but decline to join in the comment regarding the sentence. The severity of the sentence is not an issue on appeal, and this court has not been furnished a record or briefs in that regard. There well may be factors properly known to the trial court which are unknown to us. Therefore, consideration of the sentence, other than its legality, is not the appropriate province of this court.