State v. Merritt, 97-1698

Decision Date24 July 1998
Docket NumberNo. 97-1698,97-1698
Citation714 So.2d 1153
Parties23 Fla. L. Weekly D1732 STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Carl David MERRITT, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ann M. Childs, Assistant

Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Robert T. Anderson of Cianfrogna, Telfer, Reda, Faherty & Anderson, P.A., Titusville, for Appellee.

W. SHARP, Judge.

The state appeals from the trial court's order which modified Merritt's 76.9 month prison sentence for committing a lewd and lascivious or indecent act on a minor and enticing a minor to commit a lewd, lascivious or indecent act 1 to a downward departure sentence of one year and one day in state prison, followed by one year of community control, followed by six years probation. We affirm.

Merritt was originally sentenced to 76.9 months in state prison. He appealed and that sentence was affirmed by this court. See Merritt v. State, 693 So.2d 42 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). On May 28, 1997, Merritt moved for a reduction or modification of his sentence. After a hearing at which additional testimony was taken, the trial judge granted Merritt relief and summarized, in a well-reasoned order, its findings and grounds for the departure sentence.

Section 921.0016(4)(j) sets out three mitigating circumstances which, if combined, may justify a downward departure, but it does not define the terms used: an "isolated" incident, committed in an "unsophisticated" manner, and for which the defendant has shown "remorse." The trial court found that the three sex acts committed by Merritt had been "isolated" because they were something the defendant had never engaged in before, in his 25 year lifetime, and they took place in a relatively short span of time. Further, Merritt had no prior criminal history. That appears to us a reasonable interpretation of the statute, keeping in mind that criminal statutes should be construed liberally in favor of the person charged with a crime. 2

The court also cited grounds to conclude the sex acts were performed in an unsophisticated manner. 3 Further, the court, based on new testimony, concluded that the defendant truly was remorseful about his activities immediately after being accused. The evidence adduced at the hearing supports the court's findings on these points.

The victim's father expressed the view that the defendant should receive at least one year in jail followed by probation and counseling. The officer from the Department of Corrections who prepared the presentence investigation report recommended a sentence of one year of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • Kilgore v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 21 Junio 2006
    ...charged with a crime. See Perkins v. State, 576 So.2d 1310 (Fla.1991); Ferguson v. State, 377 So.2d 709 (Fla.1979); State v. Merritt, 714 So.2d 1153, 1154 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Quinn v. State, 662 So.2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Ivory v. State, 588 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). The rule of ......
  • State v. Hollinger
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 15 Junio 2018
    ...[he] was accused of' is not the kind of remorse contemplated by the legislature."). 3. We recognize the holdings in State v. Merritt, 714 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), and State v. Randall, 746 So. 2d 550, 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), but find that this case is distinguishable based on the n......
  • State v. Stephenson
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 11 Febrero 2008
    ...and theft were not isolated incidents when defendant had ten felony and four misdemeanor prior convictions), with State v. Merritt, 714 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (concluding that charged crimes were isolated incidents when they were activities defendant had never engaged in before, the......
  • State v. Fureman, 5D12–2778.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 21 Febrero 2014
    ...is committed in an unsophisticated manner if the offender's conduct was “artless, simple and not refined.” State v. Merritt, 714 So.2d 1153, 1154 n. 3 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). The facts in State v. Fleming, 751 So.2d 620, 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), and State v. Gilson, 800 So.2d 727 (Fla. 5th DCA......
  • 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