Henry v. State
82 So. 3d 1084
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Henry, age 17 at the time of offenses, was convicted of multiple nonhomicide offenses, including three counts of sexual battery with a deadly weapon or physical force, kidnapping with intent to commit a felony, two counts of robbery, carjacking, burglary of a dwelling, and cannabis possession.
- The trial court sentenced him in 2008 to life on counts I–III, 30 years for kidnapping, 15 for robbery, 30 for carjacking, 15 for another robbery, 15 for burglary, and 364 days for cannabis, with complex concurrent/consecutive running order.
- A nunc pro tunc order later removed any minimum mandatory term for Count V, adjusting the sentence structure.
- Henry appealed and later obtained a Rule 3.800(b) motion hearing, resulting in resentencing to 30 years on the sexual battery counts, concurrent with each other but consecutive to the other counts, totaling 90 years in prison.
- Henry contends that the aggregate term-of-years sentence functions as a de facto life sentence without parole and violates Graham v. Florida’s Eighth Amendment safeguards for juveniles.
- The Florida appellate court ultimately concluded that Graham does not render the aggregate sentence invalid, citing gridline cases and differing jurisdictional approaches.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the aggregate term-of-years sentence violate Graham for a juvenile nonhomicide offense? | Henry: de facto life sentence; Graham applies to nonhomicide juvenile cases. | State: Graham does not control aggregate term-of-years; not a true LWOP; still constitutionally permissible. | Not invalid under Eighth Amendment; Graham not triggered. |
| Should the 85% time-served rule affect constitutionality of Henry’s sentence? | Henry would serve well beyond his life expectancy; argues cruel and unusual punishment. | Time served and gain-time mechanics do not render the sentence unconstitutional. | Court did not strike down the sentence based on time-served calculus. |
| Is Graham’s prohibition limited to life-without-parole on a homicide violation, or does it extend to long-term term-of-years sentences for juveniles? | Henry’s sentence is effectively life without parole for a juvenile nonhomicide offense. | Graham does not automatically bar lengthy term-of-years sentences; different state outcomes possible. | Graham does not apply to invalidate Henry’s aggregate sentence under the circumstances. |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (U.S. 2010) (juvenile nonhomicide LWOP unconstitutional; must provide release opportunity)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (U.S. 2005) (juvenile sentencing standards and impairment of youthful culpability)
- Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957 (U.S. 1991) (duration and proportionality considerations in punishment)
- People v. Mendez, 188 Cal.App.4th 47 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (Graham applied to lengthy term-of-years in California cases)
- People v. Caballero, 191 Cal.App.4th 1248 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (Graham-related analysis on long term sentences for juveniles)
- People v. Ramirez, 193 Cal.App.4th 613 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (considers Graham’s reach over long juvenile-term sentences)
- State v. Kasic, 265 P.3d 410 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011) (Arizona court rejects de facto LWOP challenge to aggregate sentences)
- Adams v. State, 288 Ga. 695 (Ga. 2011) (Georgia appellate approach to Graham in long juvenile-term cases)
- Middleton v. State, 313 Ga.App. 193 (Ga. Ct. App. 2011) (aggregate long-term juvenile sentences not vacated under Graham)
- Manuel v. State, 48 So.3d 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (Florida appellate consideration of Graham-related issues)