Godwin v. State

Decision Date13 March 2015
Docket NumberNo. 2D13–2117.,2D13–2117.
PartiesJonathan GODWIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Jonathan Godwin, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Diana K. Bock, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa for Appellee.

Opinion

SILBERMAN, Judge.

Jonathan Godwin seeks review of an order denying his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 after a hearing. Godwin was convicted of armed false imprisonment and robbery with a firearm after a jury trial. We affirm the denial of each of Godwin's claims but write to explain our reasoning for affirming the denial of claim 5(b).

Godwin represented himself with the assistance of standby counsel during the guilt phase of his trial; he was represented by counsel at sentencing. In claim 5(b),1 Godwin argued that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the trial court's improper consideration of his assertion of innocence and failure to show remorse.

At sentencing, defense counsel informed the trial court that the State had originally offered Godwin ten years in prison with a ten-year minimum mandatory. Counsel asserted that Godwin should not be penalized for going to trial or proceeding pro se at trial and requested that the court impose the ten-year sentence. Counsel asserted that, after ten years in prison, Godwin “would have learned his lesson and can be thereafter a contributing member of society.” In response the prosecutor pointed out the “cold, calculated” manner in which Godwin carried out the acts, the violence that he used, and his criminal history.

The trial court rejected defense counsel's argument that ten years in prison would be a sufficient sentence and expressed its fear that if Godwin were released from prison, society would be at risk. The court briefly recounted the evidence against Godwin, indicated it had no doubt that Godwin committed the crimes, and observed that Godwin had not shown the slightest remorse or acknowledgment of his actions. The court reiterated the violent nature of Godwin's acts and concluded that a sentence of life in prison for robbery with a firearm and a concurrent prison term of fifteen years for armed false imprisonment was warranted.

In rejecting claim 5(b) of Godwin's motion for relief, the postconviction court referred to the sentencing transcript and determined that the trial court's sentences were based on Godwin's violence during the commission of the crimes and the fear and suffering endured by the victims. The postconviction court found that the trial court's comments during sentencing were made to support rejection of defense counsel's argument for mitigation.

We recognize that a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Davis v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 25, 2019
    ...the court's analysis of "whether appellant's sentence was improperly influenced by his failure to admit guilt"); Godwin v. State, 160 So.3d 497, 498 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (evaluating comments in context to conclude they properly related to mitigation); Torres v. State, 124 So.3d 439, 442 (Fla.......
  • Corbitt v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 10, 2016
    ...(holding that "remorse and an admission of guilt may be grounds for mitigation of a sentence or a disposition"); Godwin v. State, 160 So.3d 497, 498 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ("[W]e agree with the postconviction court that in context, the trial court's comments at sentencing were made in connectio......
  • Sirias v. Sec'y
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • September 15, 2015
    ...and acceptance of responsibility are appropriate factors for the court to consider in mitigation of a sentence...."); Godwin v. State 160 So. 3d 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (comments at sentencing made in connection withrejection of an argument for mitigation do not violate due process); Shelton......
  • Hart v. Sec'y, Case No. 8:16-cv-770-T-36AAS
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • January 30, 2019
    ...(holding that "remorse and an admission of guilt may be grounds for mitigation of a sentence or a disposition"); Godwin v. State, 160 So.3d 497, 498 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ("[W]e agree with the postconviction court that in context, the trial court's comments at sentencing were made in connectio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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