Tyson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tyson v. State

153 So. 3d 935, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 14937, 2014 WL 4724439

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 24, 2014

Docket2D12-2296

StatusPublished

This text of 153 So. 3d 935 (Tyson 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

Tyson v. State, 153 So. 3d 935, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 14937, 2014 WL 4724439 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

CASE, JAMES R., Associate Senior Judge.

Shawn A. Tyson appeals his judgments and sentences for two counts of first-degree murder. We affirm his judgments without discussion. However, as the State concedes, we must reverse his sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole pursuant to the holding in Miller v. Alabama, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), because Mr. Tyson was sixteen years old when the crimes were committed. In Miller, 132 S.Ct. at 2460-61, the Supreme Court held that a sentencing scheme requiring a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. We must therefore reverse Mr. Tyson’s sentence and remand his case for a new sentencing hearing in compliance with Rodriguez-Giudicelli v. State, 143 So.3d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). As this court did in Rodriguez-Giudicelli, we certify the same question of great public importance:

WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISION IN MILLER V. ALABAMA, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), WHICH INVALIDATED SECTION 775.082(1)’S MANDATORY IMPOSITION OF LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE SENTENCES FOR JUVENILES CONVICTED OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER, OPERATES TO REVIVE THE PRIOR SENTENCE OF LIFE WITH PAROLE ELIGIBILITY AFTER 25 YEARS PREVIOUSLY CONTAINED IN THAT STATUTE?

39 Fla. L. Weekly at D1089,143 So.3d 947.

Judgments affirmed, sentences reversed, and question certified.

LaROSE and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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

CASE, JAMES R., Associate Senior Judge.

Shawn A. Tyson appeals his judgments and sentences for two counts of first-degree murder. We affirm his judgments without discussion. However, as the State concedes, we must reverse his sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole pursuant to the holding in Miller v. Alabama, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), because Mr. Tyson was sixteen years old when the crimes were committed. In Miller, 132 S.Ct. at 2460-61, the Supreme Court held that a sentencing scheme requiring a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. We must therefore reverse Mr. Tyson’s sentence and remand his case for a new sentencing hearing in compliance with Rodriguez-Giudicelli v. State, 143 So.3d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). As this court did in Rodriguez-Giudicelli, we certify the same question of great public importance:

WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISION IN MILLER V. ALABAMA, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), WHICH INVALIDATED SECTION 775.082(1)’S MANDATORY IMPOSITION OF LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE SENTENCES FOR JUVENILES CONVICTED OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER, OPERATES TO REVIVE THE PRIOR SENTENCE OF LIFE WITH PAROLE ELIGIBILITY AFTER 25 YEARS PREVIOUSLY CONTAINED IN THAT STATUTE?

39 Fla. L. Weekly at D1089,143 So.3d 947.

Judgments affirmed, sentences reversed, and question certified.

LaROSE and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 So. 3d 935, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 14937, 2014 WL 4724439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tyson-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack