Henry v. State
| Decision Date | 27 February 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-663,85-663 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 523 Robert G. HENRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Daniel J. Schafer, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Margene A. Roper, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a conviction and sentence for manslaughter.
The first point on appeal involves alleged prosecutorial misconduct regarding a comment about the failure of the defendant to call witnesses for his defense. There was no misconduct and no error. Defense counsel invited the comments by his argument regarding the failure of the state to present certain evidence and call certain witnesses. The state attorney's comments were fair rebuttal.
The second point on appeal involves a sentence enhancement. Because a firearm was possessed in the commission of the crime, appellant's sentence was enhanced from a second degree felony punishment to a first degree felony punishment under authority of section 775.087(1), Florida Statutes (1983). It was error for the court to have enhanced the penalty because before that can lawfully be done, there must be a specific finding by the jury that a firearm was possessed during the commission of the manslaughter. State v. Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385 (Fla.1984), which cites and implicitly overrules Tindall v. State, 443 So.2d 362 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
The third point on appeal involves a departure sentence under the guidelines. Because we must remand this case for resentencing under point two we express no opinion regarding the departure.
The conviction is affirmed, the sentence vacated and this cause remanded for resentencing as a second degree felony.
Conviction AFFIRMED; sentence VACATED, REMANDED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cobas-Torres v. State, COBAS-TORRE
...court's reclassification. State v. Smith, 462 So.2d 1102 (Fla.1985); State v. Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385 (Fla.1984); Henry v. State, 483 So.2d 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Daniels v. State, 473 So.2d 722 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Lopez v. State, 470 So.2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Streeter v. State, 416 ......
-
Fischer v. State
...need not render a specific verdict finding possession for enhancement of a sentence. As the fifth district states in Henry v. State, 483 So.2d 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), the supreme court in State v. Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385 (Fla.1984), cited and implicitly overruled Tindall.3 § 810.02(3), Fl......
-
State v. Hargrove
...2d DCA 1988) (the proper means to determine whether firearm was used is by specific question on the verdict form); Henry v. State, 483 So.2d 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) (enhancement was error where there was no specific While a specific question or special verdict form is the clearest way by wh......
-
Manning v. State, 4D00-2995.
...597 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Heuss v. State, 660 So.2d 1052, 1058 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), approved, 687 So.2d 823 (Fla.1996); Henry v. State, 483 So.2d 860, 861 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). We have reviewed the entire argument and conclude that any errors were harmless beyond a reasonable Affirmed. DELL an......