Bell v. State
| Decision Date | 20 November 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-84,91-84 |
| Parties | 16 Fla. L. Weekly D2921 Michael D. BELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael D. Bell, in pro. per.
No appearance for appellee.
Appellant, Michael Bell, appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Bell claims the trial court erred in sentencing him to a three-year minimum mandatory sentence without establishing in the record that he had actual possession of a firearm during commission of the crime, and in imposing a 20-year sentence for robbery without a firearm, which is in excess of that authorized under Florida law. We reverse.
Bell pled guilty to kidnapping without a firearm in counts one and two, robbery without a firearm in count three, and robbery with a firearm in count four. The plea agreement and the transcript of the sentencing hearing indicate that Bell was to receive four concurrent 20-year sentences on each count, with a mandatory three-year sentence under Section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes, on count four for robbery with a firearm. At the plea/sentencing hearing, the trial court inquired whether the defendant's plea was voluntary, but did not make any inquiry on the record regarding whether there was a factual basis for the plea.
Bell filed a motion to correct sentence, alleging that the minimum mandatory sentence imposed as to count four for the offense of armed robbery was invalid because there was no showing, as required by law, that he was in actual possession of a firearm during the commission of the robbery, and that the sentence in count three for robbery without a firearm was in excess of the penalty authorized by law. The trial court denied Bell's motion, stating that by pleading guilty to robbery with a firearm in count four, Bell thereby admitted to possessing a firearm during the robbery; thus the sentencing court had properly sentenced him to the three-year mandatory minimum; and that Bell had agreed to be sentenced to a total of 20 years on the four counts; therefore he was properly sentenced to 20 years on count three. We disagree on both points.
Constructive or vicarious possession of a firearm, although sufficient to sustain a conviction for robbery with a firearm, is insufficient to constitute possession under Section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (1989), which requires a minimum three-year prison term for a person convicted of robbery with a firearm. Earnest v. State, 351 So.2d 957 (Fla.1977); Bellinger v. State, 514 So.2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). To justify a mandatory minimum, the defendant, rather than an accomplice, must physically or actually possess the weapon during the crime. Thus, the trial court at bar erred in concluding that by pleading guilty to count four, Bell admitted to personally carrying a firearm during the robbery.
The trial court was therefore required at the plea hearing to determine whether there was a factual basis for the minimum-mandatory sentence. Williams v. State, 534 So.2d 929 (Fla.1988). The requirement that a trial court ascertain the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Small v. State, 94-1342
-
Mancino v. State, 97-00583
...this area of the law stems from a First District case. See Anfield v. State, 615 So.2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (citing Bell v. State, 589 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), in support of proposition that a three-year minimum mandatory sentence imposed pursuant to section 775.087(2) constitutes ......
-
Brown v. State, 93-03533
...v. State, 589 So.2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Even the First District has not consistently followed this rule. See Bell v. State, 589 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). It is clear that Second District precedent directly conflicts with There are valid reasons for permitting postconviction relie......
-
State v. Smith
...when the defendant had nothing more than what the Supreme Court had referred to as "vicarious possession") include Bell v. State, 589 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA1991); Hicks v. State, 583 So.2d 1106 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); and Bellinger v. State, 514 So.2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA1987). More recently, i......