Alleyne V. United States

54 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Jones
  962 F.3d 1290· 11th Cir.· 2020-06-16 ·cited 37×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed denials for Jones and Jackson, but vacated denials for Allen and Johnson, remanding for clarification on whether the district court understood its discretion to reduce sentences under the First Step Act.
• Rodrick D. Williams v. State
  242 So. 3d 280· Fla.· 2018-02-22 ·cited 36×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Alleyne v. United States requires a jury, not a trial court, to make the factual finding under Fla. Stat. § 775.082(1)(b) as to whether a juvenile offender actually killed, intended to kill, or attempted to kill the victim, because such finding
• In re Ulysses Cannon
  931 F.3d 1236· 11th Cir.· 2019-07-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a motion for leave to file a successive motion is granted as to one conviction and denied as to two others, based on the prima facie showing of statutory criteria.
• Tush-ee Lewis Hunter v. State
  174 So. 3d 1011· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-05-12 ·cited 25×
  Hunter appeals his convictions for robbery with a deadly weapon and aggravated assault, challenging the trial court's competency determination, admission of 9-1-1 call evidence containing double hearsay, and sentencing as a Habitual Violent Felony Offender and Prison Releasee Reo
• Sawyers v. State
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-02-27 ·cited 19×
  Tyler Sawyers appeals his twenty-five-year mandatory minimum sentence for aggravated battery with a firearm, arguing the information was defective because it failed to allege that great bodily harm resulted "as the result of" the firearm discharge. The Second District affirmed, h
• Colon v. State
  211 So. 3d 355· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-02-24 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the appellant's sentence and certified a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court regarding jury findings for juvenile offenders.
• United States v. Laneesha Colston
  4 F.4th 1179· 11th Cir.· 2021-07-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the government need only prove knowledge that a controlled substance was involved, not knowledge of the specific substance, to convict under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and § 846.
• Parker v. United States
  993 F.3d 1257· 11th Cir.· 2021-04-06 ·cited 15×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Parker's § 2255 motion, holding that his claim was procedurally defaulted and, alternatively, that the inclusion of an invalid predicate offense was harmless error due to the jury's reliance on valid drug trafficking pr
• United States v. Moore
  22 F.4th 1258· 11th Cir.· 2022-01-13 ·cited 9×
  Anthony Moore appealed his sentences for violating supervised release three times and for criminal contempt, arguing that the district court imposed sentences violating the Fifth and Sixth Amendments by exceeding statutory limits and without proper procedures. The Eleventh Circui
• Corderro Ryan Britten v. State
  181 So. 3d 1215· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-12-11 ·cited 9×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in making the finding required for a dangerous sexual felony offender designation, the error was harmless because the record demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have made the finding.
• Kimothy Mark Simmons v. State
  267 So. 3d 1067· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-03-07 ·cited 8×
  Simmons, a juvenile convicted of first-degree felony murder, appealed his life sentence imposed under Florida Statutes sections 775.082 and 921.1402. The appellate court affirmed the sentence, rejecting his claims that the trial court erred in its sentencing findings and that a j
• Dames v. State
  186 So. 3d 593· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-02-24 ·cited 8×
  Byron Dames appealed his sentence of nearly 80 months in prison imposed after he admitted to a third violation of probation. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the sentence, rejecting his argument that the inclusion of 80 points for sexual penetration on his sentencing
• United States v. Clark
  32 F.4th 1080· 11th Cir.· 2022-04-28 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the district court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial based on Brady material, denying the motion to suppress, or in its jury instructions, as any error was invited by the defendant.
• Bean v. State
  264 So. 3d 947· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-01-09 ·cited 7×
  Appellant challenged his sentence imposed after pleading guilty to multiple charges related to an armed bank robbery involving violence and sexual assault. The appellate court upheld the sentencing scoresheet's inclusion of victim injury points but reversed the costs assessment a
• Marlena Christine Woods v. State
  214 So. 3d 803· Fla. 1st DCA· 2017-04-24 ·cited 6×
• Washington v. State
  47 Fla. L. Weekly D315· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-03-16 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed a decision regarding whether a defendant's status as a prison releasee reoffender must be determined by a jury or can be determined by the trial court. The court held that the trial court, rather than a jury, may determine whether a defendant's instant offense
• Narvaez v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-03-16 ·cited 4×
  Albert Narvaez appealed his conviction for attempted first-degree murder, aggravated assault, false imprisonment, firearm discharge, and battery (domestic). The court reversed his sentence on the battery charge because the jury instruction failed to address the domestic violence
• In re STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIM. CASES-REPORT 2018-08.
  259 So. 3d 754· Fla.· 2018-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court authorized amendments to three standard criminal jury instructions (7.3 on Felony Murder–First Degree, 7.4 on Murder–Second Degree, and 10.7(d) on Destructive Devices) to comply with the Court's holding in Williams v. State that Alleyne v. United States
• Jackson v. State
  241 So. 3d 914· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-02-19 ·cited 4×
  Christopher Jackson appeals his convictions for burglary, aggravated assault, and armed robbery, challenging the legality of searches conducted during his arrest and the trial court's determination of his PRR status for sentencing purposes. The court affirmed Jackson's conviction
• Culp v. State
  141 So. 3d 1279· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-07-21 ·cited 4×
• Singletary v. State
  338 So. 3d 318· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-03-16 ·cited 3×
  Shawn Singletary appealed his resentencing following a juvenile resentencing hearing where he received two concurrent life sentences with eligibility for judicial review after 25 years. The court affirmed the resentencing order, rejecting Singletary's arguments that the sentence
• In re Standard Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases - Report 2018-13
  272 So. 3d 1210· Fla.· 2019-06-06 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed proposed amendments and new standard jury instructions in criminal cases submitted by its Committee. The Court authorized most of the proposed changes, including revisions to instructions on insanity, involuntary intoxication, and entrapment, an
• Cartagena v. State
  237 So. 3d 417· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-01-10 ·cited 3×
  Evidence of post-crime destruction of property is admissible as inextricably intertwined to show the defendant's state of mind and provide context for the charged crime. However, a sentencing multiplier that increases the mandatory minimum sentence requires jury submission of the
• United States v. Pinkney Clowers, III
  62 F.4th 1377· 11th Cir.· 2023-03-14 ·cited 2×
  A district court cannot reduce a sentence under the First Step Act if the defendant would have received the same mandatory statutory penalty under the Fair Sentencing Act, and the court is bound by prior drug-quantity findings that could have been used to determine that penalty.
• United States v. Jackson
  995 F.3d 1308· 11th Cir.· 2021-05-03 ·cited 2×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the First Step Act's "as if" language limits sentence reduction eligibility to cases where the Fair Sentencing Act would have actually lowered the penalty, and district courts are bound by previous drug quantity findings.
• Butler v. State
  297 So. 3d 691· Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-06-11 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court affirmed a defendant's convictions and sentence for leaving the scene of a crash and reckless driving. The court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to determine the defendant did not "immediately stop" and that any sentencing error regarding "s
• Washington v. State
  257 So. 3d 520· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-09-26 ·cited 1×
  When sentencing a juvenile offender for crimes of violence, a jury rather than a judge must make the factual finding of whether the defendant actually killed, intended to kill, or attempted to kill the victim.
• Howard v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-04-10
  The Court denies the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding that one ground is procedurally barred and the others fail on the merits under AEDPA's deferential standard of review.
• Jackson v. Sec'y Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  N.D. Fla.· 2025-02-28
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner cannot challenge a Fourth Amendment claim if the state provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate it, and that the Prison Releasee Reoffender sentencing enhancement was constitutional as applied.
• Leppert v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corrections(Putnam County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-27
  Morgan Amanda Leppert, convicted at age 15 of first-degree murder and nonhomicide felonies, sought federal habeas relief challenging the constitutionality of Florida's juvenile sentencing scheme and alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The District Court for the Middle Dis
• Thomas v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-21
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were either not cognizable on federal habeas review, procedurally barred, or failed to meet the high standard for relief under AEDPA.
• Wright v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-02-15
  The court held that the prisoner's motion to vacate his convictions and sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 should be denied because his claims lack merit, are procedurally barred, or are procedurally defaulted.
• Heathcliff Peters v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-07-13
  The court affirmed a decision regarding sentencing enhancement under Florida's prison releasee reoffender statute. The case addresses whether a jury or trial court must determine whether a defendant committed an offense within three years of release from a state correctional faci
• Moss v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-05-03
  Theodore Moss, a Florida inmate convicted of first-degree murder and armed burglary in 2013, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising nine grounds for relief including jury instruction errors and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The
• Pineda Castro v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-04-29
  The court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the motion to vacate the sentence.
• Narvaez v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-01-05
  The appellate court reversed and remanded a battery conviction for resentencing because the jury instructions did not specify domestic violence, meaning the trial court improperly treated it as such during sentencing. The court affirmed all other convictions.
• Washington v. State
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-10-22
  The appellate court reversed a defendant's sentence for the third time, holding that the lower court erred by failing to conduct a de novo sentencing proceeding as required by statute after previous reversals. The court also found that the defendant should be resentenced by a dif
• Shaabazz v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-06-07
  Hassan Shaabazz, an inmate convicted of burglary of an occupied dwelling in 2013 and sentenced to twenty-three years imprisonment, filed a federal habeas corpus petition raising claims of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. The court denied the petition, findin
• Reese v. Warden, FCC Coleman - Low
  M.D. Fla.· 2021-01-06
  The court held that a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is not available to challenge the validity of a sentence when 28 U.S.C. § 2255 provides an adequate and effective remedy.
• Ferrier v. Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  N.D. Fla.· 2020-11-23
  The court held that while the petitioner was denied his right to a jury finding on a fact essential to his minimum mandatory sentence under Alleyne v. United States, this error was harmless because the evidence overwhelmingly established the fact, and therefore, relief under § 22
• United States v. Allen
  11th Cir.· 2020-06-16
  The court affirmed sentence reduction denials for Jones and Jackson, but vacated denials for Allen and Johnson, remanding for clarification on whether the district court understood its discretion to reduce sentences.
• United States v. Johnson
  11th Cir.· 2020-06-16
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed denials of sentence reductions for Jones and Jackson, but vacated denials for Allen and Johnson, remanding for clarification on whether the district courts understood their discretion to reduce sentences.
• United States v. Jackson
  11th Cir.· 2020-06-16
  The court affirmed denials for Jones and Jackson, but vacated denials for Allen and Johnson, remanding for clarification on whether the district court understood its discretion to reduce sentences.
• Jossey v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Duval County)
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-05-15
  Larry G. Jossey, Jr., an inmate proceeding without counsel, petitioned for federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his state court conviction for armed robbery on eight grounds, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, jury instruction errors, and
• Leaks v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-05-01
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to deny Petitioner Leaks' motion to vacate his sentence, finding his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and sentencing errors to be without merit.
• Borrero v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-04-22
  Jonathan Borrero challenged the revocation of his probation and resulting sentence. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to make required findings of dangerousness for a violent felony offender of special concern, as mandated by
• Borrero v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-04-22
  When a trial court revokes probation for a violent felony offender of special concern, it must make explicit findings of dangerousness as required by section 948.06(8)(e)1., Florida Statutes, and failure to do so requires reversal and remand for resentencing.
• Diaz v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-03-03
  The court held that the exclusionary rule does not apply to supervised release revocation proceedings, thus counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the traffic stop. The court also found that the grade of supervised release violations need not be determined by a jury
• Cato v. State
  M.D. Fla.· 2019-12-17
  The federal court denied a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition because the state court's rejection of his claims regarding sentencing enhancements was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
• Vereen v. State
  267 So. 3d 548· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-03-28
  The trial court properly imposed penetration points under the Criminal Punishment Code despite no jury finding of that specific element, and the procedural due process requirements were satisfied; however, discretionary fines and surcharges that were not orally pronounced at sent