Andrews v. State
82 So. 3d 979
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Appellant Megaleto Andrews challenges two HVFO-enhanced convictions for failure to report a temporary residence under Florida’s sexual offender registration statute.
- Sentenced as HVFO to two consecutive ten-year terms, total twenty years, for the two counts.
- Temporary residence alleged was an apartment leased by Andrews’ pregnant girlfriend; he claimed he did not live there.
- Evidence at trial included witnesses placing him around the complex and direct statements that he lived there; he testified he resided with his mother.
- Appellant preserved four appellate issues: acquittal, admission of testimony, double jeopardy, and cruel-and-unusual punishment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Judgment of acquittal sufficiency | Andrews argues evidence failed to negate reasonable innocence. | State offered direct and circumstantial evidence of residency at the complex. | Denial of acquittal affirmed; evidence supported residency finding. |
| Admissibility of Emerson testimony | Emerson’s remarks about being asked out were irrelevant to residency. | Testimony helps prove residency; otherwise relevant. | Most of Emerson testimony is admissible; any error harmless. |
| Double jeopardy for two reporting failures | Two counts constitute double jeopardy duplication. | HVFO context and statute authorize separate convictions. | No double jeopardy violation; upheld. |
| Cruel and unusual punishment | Twenty-year HVFO sentence for nonviolent triggering offense is excessive. | HVFO framework and violent history justify length; Solem inapplicable. | Not cruel and unusual; within constitutional bounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (U.S. Supreme Court 1983) (Eighth Amendment limits on sentencing; not length per se)
- Bloodworth v. State, 504 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (Solem applicability limited to non-violent felonies)
- Long v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) (Solem applies to non-violent felonies; distinction maintained)
- State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986) (Harmless-error standard for trial court errors)
- Eaglin v. State, 19 So. 3d 935 (Fla. 2009) (Brief lack of remorse can be harmless)
- State v. Schopp, 653 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 1995) (Cumulative evidence supports harmless error finding)
- Wardell, State v. Wardell, 329 Mont. 9, 122 P.3d 443 (Mont. 2005) (Cross-jurisdictional comparison on similar penalties)
- Rummel v. Estelle, 445 U.S. 263 (U.S. Supreme Court 1980) (State may impose heavy penalties for repeat felonies)