Bici v. State
Decision Date | 27 March 2020 |
Docket Number | Case No. 5D19-798 |
Citation | 292 So.3d 1248 |
Parties | Suzana Jordan BICI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert David Malove, of The Law Office of Robert David Malove, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Suzana Bici appeals the judgment and sentence imposed following her convictions of driving under the influence ("DUI") manslaughter and DUI with serious bodily injury.1 Bici raises two issues on appeal: the trial court erred in its denial of her motion to suppress a blood draw and its consideration of improper factors in imposing sentence. We affirm the trial court’s denial of Bici’s motion to suppress without comment, and thus, affirm her convictions. However, because the trial court erred in its consideration of improper factors in imposing sentence, we vacate Bici’s sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge.
On the night in question, Bici drove three of her friends to the store to purchase alcohol but failed to negotiate a curve in the road and crashed. One occupant of her vehicle died and another was seriously injured. A blood draw revealed that Bici’s blood alcohol level was well beyond the legal limit at the time of the accident.
Bici pled not guilty to DUI manslaughter and DUI with serious bodily injury. Following her unsuccessful attempt to suppress her blood draw results, Bici proceeded to trial, and the jury found her guilty as charged.
Bici moved for a downward departure sentence pursuant to sections 921.0026(1)(f) and (j), Florida Statutes (2016), alleging that: (1) the occupants of the vehicle were willing participants, and (2) her offenses were committed in an unsophisticated manner and were isolated incidents for which she had shown remorse. At her sentencing hearing, Bici apologized to the victims’ families, took responsibility for her actions, and stated that she was remorseful. The State objected to a downward departure sentence and presented evidence that Bici had a pending DUI charge at the time she committed the offenses at issue.2
Following both parties’ arguments, the trial court addressed Bici:
(Emphasis added). The trial court denied Bici’s motion for a downward departure sentence.
On appeal, Bici argues that the trial court erred in viewing the actions she took in defense of the charges against her as evidence of her lack of remorse.3 The State responds that the trial court appropriately considered whether Bici had shown remorse because she moved to mitigate her sentence on that basis. See, e.g., Rankin v. State, 174 So. 3d 1092, 1097–98 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) ( ). However, Bici’s argument is not that the trial court erred in considering whether she showed remorse; rather, she argues that the trial court impermissibly equated her...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Judgment and sentence
...for its decision to show that the defendant lacked remorse during a sentencing hearing - this was improper consideration. Bici v. State, 292 So. 3d 1248 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) There is no statutory authority for a court to impose a $3000 donation to the ASPCA upon conviction for fighting and b......