Cunningham v. State

54 So. 3d 1045, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1526, 2011 WL 613698
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 9, 2011
DocketNo. 3D10-3409
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 54 So. 3d 1045 (Cunningham v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cunningham v. State, 54 So. 3d 1045, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1526, 2011 WL 613698 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

EMAS, J.

The defendant, Michael Cunningham, appeals the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Cunningham had previously appealed the denial of his Rule 3.800 motion to correct sentence upon the same grounds: that he was a juvenile at the time of the commission of the crimes (four nonhomicide life felonies) and was sentenced to four concurrent life sentences. Cunningham contends that this sentence violates Graham v. Florida, — U.S. -, -, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 2030, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), which held:

This Court now holds that for a juvenile offender who did not commit homicide the Eighth Amendment forbids the sentence of life without parole. This clear line is necessary to prevent the possibility that life without parole sentences will be imposed on juvenile nonhomicide offenders who are not sufficiently culpable to merit that punishment. Because “[t]he age of 18 is the point where society draws the line for many purposes between childhood and adulthood,” those [1046]*1046who were below that age when the offense was committed may not be sentenced to life without parole for a nonho-micide crime.

(Emphasis supplied.)

Unlike the defendant in Graham, Cunningham is statutorily entitled to parole consideration because he committed the offenses prior to the effective date of the statute creating sentencing guidelines and eliminating parole. See Ch. 1983-87, § 2, Laws of Fla. Cunningham acknowledged as much in his motion, where he alleged that his Presumptive Parole Release Date is in 2026 and his next parole reinterview is in 2013.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Reid v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017
Franklin v. State
141 So. 3d 210 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 So. 3d 1045, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1526, 2011 WL 613698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cunningham-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.