Tyrone D. Mosby v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tyrone D. Mosby v. State

197 So. 3d 1146, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 10154, 2016 WL 3569891

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 2016

Docket5D14-2825

StatusPublished

This text of 197 So. 3d 1146 (Tyrone D. Mosby 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

Tyrone D. Mosby v. State, 197 So. 3d 1146, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 10154, 2016 WL 3569891 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tyrone Mosby (“Defendant”) appeals his judgment and sentence for a series of charges pertaining to two shootings. Defendant raises five issues upon appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in: 1) denying his motion for new trial based upon alleged discovery violations; 2) preventing him from commenting upon the State’s decision not to call a witness during trial; 3) sustaining the State’s objection to a defense comment during closing argument that the reporting witness may have been the shooter; 4) finding Defendant competent to proceed to sentencing; and 5) enhancing his aggravated battery charge from a second-degree felony to a first-degree felony. We affirm the first four issues without further discussion.

However, the trial court erred in enhancing Defendant’s aggravated battery charge without a clear finding that he used a firearm in the commission of the crime. See Roberts v. State, 152 So.3d 669, 672 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“[T]he enhanced penalty [must] be predicated upon a ‘clear jury finding’ that the defendant possessed a firearm during the commission of the felony.”). Based upon the State’s concession of error, we reverse the sentence imposed for aggravated battery and remand for resentencing on that charge as a second-degree felony.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, EVANDER and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Tyrone Mosby (“Defendant”) appeals his judgment and sentence for a series of charges pertaining to two shootings. Defendant raises five issues upon appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in: 1) denying his motion for new trial based upon alleged discovery violations; 2) preventing him from commenting upon the State’s decision not to call a witness during trial; 3) sustaining the State’s objection to a defense comment during closing argument that the reporting witness may have been the shooter; 4) finding Defendant competent to proceed to sentencing; and 5) enhancing his aggravated battery charge from a second-degree felony to a first-degree felony. We affirm the first four issues without further discussion.

However, the trial court erred in enhancing Defendant’s aggravated battery charge without a clear finding that he used a firearm in the commission of the crime. See Roberts v. State, 152 So.3d 669, 672 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“[T]he enhanced penalty [must] be predicated upon a ‘clear jury finding’ that the defendant possessed a firearm during the commission of the felony.”). Based upon the State’s concession of error, we reverse the sentence imposed for aggravated battery and remand for resentencing on that charge as a second-degree felony.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, EVANDER and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 So. 3d 1146, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 10154, 2016 WL 3569891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tyrone-d-mosby-v-state-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack