Leronnie Lee Walton v. State of Florida
208 So. 3d 60
| Fla. | 2016Background
- On Sept. 10, 2008, three men attempted to rob Kristina Salas and Karine Nalbandyan; two men shot at responding detectives. Walton was later identified as one shooter.
- A teenage eyewitness (Antoinette Gillan) was shown two six-photo arrays about two months after the incident; detectives pressed her after a hesitant reaction to a photo and she identified Walton.
- Walton was convicted of two counts of attempted murder of law-enforcement officers (with firearm possession/discharge enhancements) and two counts of attempted armed robbery (with firearm possession enhancements). The trial court imposed consecutive mandatory minimum terms under the 10-20-Life statute. Walton was absent at resentencing; the First DCA reversed the resentencing on that ground and held 10-20-Life mandatory minimums must run consecutively even where the firearm was only displayed or carried.
- The Florida Supreme Court granted review. It addressed three principal errors Walton raised: (1) sentencing under section 775.087 (10-20-Life); (2) failure to instruct on attempted manslaughter as a necessarily lesser included offense of attempted second-degree murder; and (3) admissibility of Gillan’s out-of-court photo identification.
- The Court quashed the First District to the extent inconsistent with its precedents, held the jury instruction omission and the suggestive photo array required reversal, and remanded for a new trial excluding Gillan’s tainted ID and with an attempted-manslaughter instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Walton’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 10-20-Life mandatory minimum terms must be imposed consecutively for offenses arising from a single criminal episode even when firearm only carried/displayed | Consecutive mandatory minimums are not authorized in all cases; Walton contends stacking is not required/authorized as interpreted by the First DCA | The statute permits (and the First DCA held requires) consecutive mandatory minimums for separate offenses under 775.087 | Court: Quashes First DCA to extent inconsistent with Williams; consecutive mandatory minimums impermissible where offenses arise from same episode and firearm was possessed but not discharged (followed Williams) |
| Failure to instruct on attempted manslaughter (necessarily lesser included of attempted second‑degree murder) | Trial court erred by not instructing jury on attempted manslaughter; omission is mandatory when supported by pleadings and evidence | Jury instruction on lesser charge was not required / evidence did not support it | Court: Omission was error and constituted fundamental error; new trial required with correct instruction on attempted manslaughter |
| Admissibility of eyewitness identification from photo array (due process) | Photo procedure was impermissibly suggestive and police comments created substantial likelihood of misidentification; identification should have been suppressed | Procedure was not unnecessarily suggestive; officer merely followed up on witness’ reaction and witness independently recognized defendant | Court: Detective’s repeated prompting rendered the procedure suggestive and, under the Biggers factors, the identification was unreliable; admission tainted convictions — reverse and exclude Gillan’s ID at retrial |
| Remedy and scope of remand (including resentencing defects) | Relief sought: reversal/new trial; challenge to consecutive stacking and to tainted ID/instructions | State sought to uphold convictions/sentences; alternative harmless‑error arguments | Court: Quashes First DCA insofar as inconsistent with its precedents; reverses convictions and remands for new trial with attempted‑manslaughter instruction and exclusion of the tainted ID (sentencing issue resolved according to Williams) |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 186 So.3d 989 (Fla. 2016) (consecutive 10‑20‑Life mandatory minimums impermissible where offenses arose from same episode and firearm was possessed but not discharged)
- Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1983) (court previously limited stacking of mandatory minimums; discussed in concurrence)
- Cotto v. State, 139 So.3d 283 (Fla. 2014) (legislative statements of intent can bear on whether statutes limit judicial discretion to impose consecutive sentences)
- Sepulvado v. State, 362 So.2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (photo identification procedure found suggestive where police pointed witness to specific photos)
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (U.S. 1972) (five‑factor test for assessing reliability of pretrial identifications)
- Fitzpatrick v. State, 900 So.2d 495 (Fla. 2005) (application of Biggers factors and evaluation of time gap between event and identification)