Sterling Allen Johnson v. State of Florida
219 So. 3d 167
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Johnson was charged with aggravated battery on a law enforcement officer and fleeing/attempting to elude after a traffic stop; video captured the stop and flight.
- A jury acquitted Johnson of aggravated battery but convicted him of fleeing/attempting to elude.
- Johnson’s scoresheet totaled 5.6 points, making the presumptive sentence a non-state sanction under section 775.082(10).
- The trial court sentenced Johnson to five years’ state prison without written findings supporting that a non-state sanction would present a danger to the public.
- After Johnson moved to correct an illegal sentence, the court made post-sentencing written findings (six listed reasons) and refused to reduce the sentence; Johnson appealed.
- The First DCA reviewed whether the written findings satisfied the statutory requirement that a non-state sanction could present a danger to the public.
Issues
| Issue | Johnson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether section 775.082(10) required written findings to impose state prison | Statute requires written findings; alternatively, claims statute unconstitutional | Agreed written findings required but argued prison permissible given court findings | Court found written findings insufficient and vacated prison sentence |
| Whether the court’s written findings established that a non-state sanction "could present a danger to the public" | Findings did not establish nexus between non-state sanction and danger to public | Court’s findings (six grounds) justified prison term | Court held findings lacked required nexus and were legally insufficient |
| Whether the court could rely on conduct for which Johnson was acquitted to justify prison | Such reliance is improper | Relied on officer-danger assertion from trial video | Court ruled relying on acquitted conduct was improper |
| Whether specific factual findings (e.g., danger to other traffic) were supported by preponderance of evidence | Video did not show danger to other traffic | Court asserted video supported traffic danger (State’s position) | Court found the record did not preponderantly support the traffic-danger finding |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. State, 71 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (interpreting "danger to the public" requirement and requiring nexus to justify prison)
- Ryerson v. State, 189 So. 3d 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (danger can include economic or non-violent harms)
- Reed v. State, 192 So. 3d 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (statute requires nexus between non-state sanction and potential danger)
- Dinkines v. State, 122 So. 3d 477 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (court may not rely on acquitted or uncharged conduct to justify sentence)
- Doty v. State, 884 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (error to base harsher sentence on charges for which defendant was acquitted)
- Rodriguez-Aguilar v. State, 198 So. 3d 792 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (findings must be supported by preponderance of record evidence)
- Bryant v. State, 148 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 2014) (on remand, court must follow mandate and cannot articulate new reasons for departure)