DURANT
v.
STATE
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.
Brandon Durant appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. Durant was convicted of eleven counts of attempted first degree murder, but the jury found he only possessed a firearm without discharging it. The trial court imposed eleven consecutive mandatory minimum ten-year sentences, which Durant challenges as illegal.
The court reversed and remanded, holding that consecutive sentencing of mandatory minimum imprisonment terms for multiple firearm offenses is impermissible when the offenses arose from the same criminal episode and a firearm was merely possessed but not discharged, as established in Williams v. State and Walton v. State.
[1] Under Florida's 10/20/Life statute, when multiple firearm offenses arise from the same criminal episode and the jury finds that a firearm was possessed but not discharged…
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 intelligenceDurant shot into a home occupied by eleven people and was charged with eleven counts of attempted first degree murder under Florida's 10/20/Life statu…
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 Firearm Discharge cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Brandon Durant, the defendant, appeals the trial court’s denial of his 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. Durant was charged with eleven counts of attempted first degree murder with a deadly weapon, after shooting into a home occupied by eleven people. He was charged under the section 775.087, Florida Statutes (2014) (“10/20/Life Statute”); each count of the information alleged that he possessed and discharged a firearm. The jury returned a guilty verdict on all eleven counts. However, the jury found that Durant only possessed a firearm and did not discharge a firearm. The trial court sentenced Durant to life in prison on each of the eleven counts and imposed eleven mandatory minimum consecutive ten-year sentences under the 10/20/Life statute. Durant alleged in his 3.800 motion that his eleven mandatory minimum ten-year sentences are illegal because they were imposed consecutively instead of concurrently.
The Florida Supreme Court has clearly delineated that “consecutive sentencing of mandatory minimum imprisonment terms for multiple firearm offenses is impermissible if the offenses arose from the same criminal episode and a firearm was merely possessed but not discharged.” Williams v. State, 186 So. 3d 989, 993 (Fla. 2016); see also Walton v. State, 208 So. 3d 60, 64 (Fla. 2016).
Accordingly, we find that the trial court erred when it consecutively sentenced Durant to eleven mandatory minimum ten-year sentences. We thus reverse and remand for correction of the sentence in accordance with the Florida Supreme Court precedent set forth in Williams, 186 So. 3d at 993, and Walton, 208 So. 3d at
64. The defendant need not be present when the trial court enters its order correcting the sentence.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 186 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2016)
- Leronnie Lee Walton v. State, 208 So. 3d 60 (Fla. 2016)