TIMOTHY JOSEPH FERGUSON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Due process does not require a trial court to provide an express explanation when denying a motion for downward departure from a mandatory minimum sentence.
[1] Due process does not guarantee a defendant the right to receive an express explanation from the trial court when a motion for downward departure from a mandatory minimum…
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“We know of no principle or case, nor has one been cited to us, which holds that due process includes the right of an express explanation on why a motion to downward depart was denied. We decline to recognize such a right.”
Court's rationale for affirming the trial court's judgment
Timothy Joseph Ferguson appealed from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit in St. Lucie County, challenging the trial court's denial …
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 Sentencing Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
TIMOTHY JOSEPH FERGUSON, Appellant,
V.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2025-1723
[April 22, 2026]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Michael Carlton Heisey, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 562014CF001172A; 562014CF001814A; 562024CF002199A.
Jonathan Jay Kirschner of Jonathan Jay Kirschner, Esq., & Associates, LLC, Fort Pierce, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Zi Jin Peter Chan, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See, inter alia, Venter v. State, 901 So. 2d 898, 898 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (“We know of no principle or case, nor has one been cited to us, which holds that due process includes the right of an express explanation on why a motion to downward depart was denied. We decline to recognize such a right.").
KLINGENSMITH, SHAW and LOTT, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.