ROBERT MULLALY
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2018-12-31
No. 17-4815
John Hill
262 So. 3d 858 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2018)

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.

Synopsis

Robert Mullaly appeals his life sentence imposed at resentencing in 2015. The court reverses and remands for resentencing because the trial judge improperly relied on a dropped 1993 assault charge during sentencing.


Holding

The court reversed the sentence because the trial judge improperly relied on the dropped 1993 assault charge during resentencing. The State failed to demonstrate that the dropped charge played no part in the sentence imposed, and the court remanded for resentencing before a different judge.


Headnotes

[1] At sentencing, a trial court may not rely upon or repeatedly refer to criminal charges that were dropped or dismissed, and when the record shows such reliance, the state…

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

Key Quotes

“When portions of the record show the trial court relied upon prior acquittals in determining a defendant's sentence, the State has the burden to demonstrate those considerations 'played no part in the sentence imposed.'”

Citing Williams v. State to establish the standard for when state must demonstrate dropped charges did not influence sentencing

Facts & Procedural History

Mullaly was convicted of rape in 1973 and initially sentenced to life imprisonment without required sexual psychotherapy treatment. In 2015, after his…

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.


Opinion of the Court

December 31, 2018 PER CURIAM.

Robert Mullaly appeals his life sentence. We reverse and remand for resentencing because, in sentencing Mr. Mullaly, the trial judge relied on a 1993 assault charge, which was dropped.

Mr. Mullaly was found guilty of rape in 1973 and was required to be treated with sexual psychotherapy as a prerequisite to his sentencing. See Slappey v. State, 584 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). See also Haager v. State, 36 So. 3d 883, 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (describing the sentencing scheme applicable to sex offenders in the 1970s). But the court sentenced him to life in prison without the required treatment. In 2015, Mr. Mullaly filed a motion to vacate the 1973 judgment and sentence and to hold a new sentencing because of the error. The court granted his motion, vacated the 1973 judgment and sentence, and found that he completed the requisite treatment. Mr. Mullaly was then resentenced to life in prison.

At Mr. Mullaly’s resentencing, the trial court considered the mitigating factors, as well as the aggravating events that happened while Mr. Mullaly was on parole. One of the events was an alleged 1993 assault on his wife, a charge that was dropped. The trial court mentioned it twelve times in the course of Mr. Mullaly’s resentencing and appeared to consider it an aggravator. Under these circumstances, we agree with Mr. Mullaly that the trial judge sentenced him improperly, by relying partly on the alleged 1993 assault on his wife. See Drinkard v. State, 177 So. 3d 993, 994 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (remanding for resentencing, because “[a]t sentencing, the trial court repeatedly referred to the state’s evidence that appellant had been racing on a highway — conduct for which appellant and a co-defendant had been charged and acquitted”). And the State failed to show that the alleged 1993 assault “played no part in the sentence imposed.” See Williams v. State, 8 So. 3d 1266, 1267 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (citations omitted) (“When portions of the record show the trial court relied upon prior acquittals in determining a defendant’s sentence, the State has the burden to demonstrate those considerations ‘played no part in the sentence imposed.’”).

Accordingly, we reverse Mr. Mullaly’s sentence and remand for sentencing before a different judge.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

MAKAR, OSTERHAUS, and JAY, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

_____________________________ Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Jasmine Russell, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw