Bulger v. State, BN-371

Decision Date10 July 1987
Docket NumberNo. BN-371,BN-371
Citation12 Fla. L. Weekly 1675,509 So.2d 1269
Parties12 Fla. L. Weekly 1675 Michael Ray BULGER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, Kenneth L. Hosford, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Mark C. Menser, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

NIMMONS, Judge.

This is an appeal from a sentence exceeding the recommended guidelines range after a plea of nolo contendere to second-degree murder and shooting into an occupied vehicle. We reverse and remand for resentencing.

From the state's recitation of facts upon the entry of the nolo plea, it appears that appellant and a friend of his had an encounter at the Green Frog nightclub with Michael Johnson (the club's "bouncer") and the victim as a result of the creation of a disturbance by the appellant and his friend. The appellant and his friend left and went to another friend's home, obtained a shotgun and returned to the Green Frog in appellant's truck. As the appellant drove by the Green Frog, Johnson and the victim got into Johnson's Jeep in order to follow the appellant and get the tag number of the truck. Appellant made a U-turn and headed in the opposite direction. As appellant was passing the Jeep, appellant fired a single shot into the Jeep inflicting the fatal wound to the victim's head. Johnson was also wounded. This incident occurred on a highway on which there was vehicular traffic and near which there was a bar, convenience store, motel and parking lot.

The trial court departed from the recommended sentencing guidelines range of 17-22 years, and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment on the murder count and a term of 15 years on the other count. The following reasons were given:

1) The defendant's crime posed an extreme risk to the physical safety of other citizens. The defendant fired the shotgun on a public highway, raising the prospect of innocent bystanders being wounded or causing a traffic accident which might have involved innocent third parties.

2) The facts of this case indicate that the Defendant and his Co-Defendant, following a confrontation with the victims, left the area, secured a weapon (a shotgun) and then returned to the area in search of further confrontation with the victims.

The first reason, risk to safety of others, has repeatedly been considered valid where supported by the record. E.G. Hannah v. State, 480 So.2d 718 (Fla....

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Davis v. State
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 23, 1987
    ...not obtained. See Scurry v. State, 489 So.2d 25, 29 (Fla.1986). We concur with the analysis of Judge Nimmons in Bulger v. State, 509 So.2d 1269, 1270 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), that a finding of premeditation is "impliedly negated by the absence of a first-degree murder conviction. This rationale......
  • Crosby v. State, 87-495
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 21, 1988
    ...25 (Fla.1986); Ventosa v. State, 510 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Rey v. State, 509 So.2d 1332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Bulger v. State, 509 So.2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); and Hall v. State, 503 So.2d 1370 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Therefore, the defendant's departure sentence is vacated and the ......
  • Bulger v. State, 88-706
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 18, 1989
    ...and supported by the record, and remanded for resentencing, pursuant to Albritton v. State, 476 So.2d 158 (Fla.1985). Bulger v. State, 509 So.2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Upon remand and without conducting a hearing, the trial court entered an amended judgment and sentence, imposing the ori......
  • Freer v. State, BP-459
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 15, 1987
    ...is invalid. Premeditation is an invalid reason for departure where a defendant is convicted of second-degree murder. Bulger v. State, 509 So.2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). At the sentencing hearing, the trial judge considered the second and third reasons together. This is evident from the jud......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT