Landy v. State
205 So. 3d 801
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- In 1992 Irvin Landy, who was seventeen at the time, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment with parole eligibility after 25 years.
- Landy filed a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) seeking resentencing under Miller v. Alabama (2012) and Florida's chapter 2014-220 remedial statute.
- The postconviction court denied the motion, relying on then-controlling precedent that held Miller inapplicable to life-with-parole-after-25-years sentences.
- While the appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court quashed the Fourth District's Atwell decision and concluded that Florida's parole system did not provide the Miller-required individualized consideration for juveniles.
- The Florida Supreme Court and this court subsequently quashed similar precedents (including McPherson), holding that juvenile life-with-parole sentences virtually indistinguishable from life without parole require resentencing under chapter 2014-220.
- This Court reversed the denial of Landy’s 3.800(a) motion and remanded for resentencing in conformity with sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 (chapter 2014-220).
Issues and Key Cases Cited
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a juvenile sentenced to life with parole eligibility after 25 years is entitled to resentencing under Miller and Florida's 2014 remedial statute | Landy: Because he was a juvenile, Miller requires individualized sentencing consideration; chapter 2014-220 provides the remedy and entitles him to resentencing | State: Sentence of life with parole after 25 years is distinguishable from life without parole and thus Miller does not apply | Court: Miller applies; life-with-parole-after-25-years in Florida's system lacks the individualized review Miller requires — reversed and remanded for resentencing under chapter 2014-220 |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory life-without-parole for juveniles unconstitutional; requires individualized consideration)
- Horsley v. State, 160 So. 3d 393 (Fla. 2015) (remedy for juvenile Miller violations is resentencing under chapter 2014-220)
- Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2016) (Florida parole statutes do not provide Miller-required individualized consideration; juvenile life-with-parole sentences require resentencing)
- McPherson v. State, 138 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (earlier decision holding Miller inapplicable to life-with-parole-after-25-years, later quashed and remanded)