Florida Court Explains Factors Considered in Reviewing Sentences

People accused of sex crimes will, at times, determine that it is best to enter a guilty plea in hopes of receiving a reduced sentence. In some cases, though, the courts will enter a greater sentence than the defendants anticipate. In such instances, the defendant may be able to appeal the sentence issued, but if they cannot demonstrate that the court committed an error, their appeal will likely be denied, as shown in a recent Florida case. If you are accused of a sex crime, it is prudent to consult a Clearwater sex crime lawyer regarding your rights.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with using a minor to produce child pornography, distributing child pornography, and possessing child pornography. The charges stemmed from an incident in October 2021, in which an online FBI employee received messages containing child pornography from an individual later identified as the defendant. Subsequent investigations revealed the defendant involvement in the production, distribution, and possession of child pornography, including images and videos of his daughter.

Reportedly, a search of the defendant’s residence uncovered evidence supporting the charges. The defendant pled guilty to all counts without objection and faced an advisory guidelines sentence of life imprisonment. At sentencing, the defendant did not contest the PSR’s recommendation. The district court considered various factors, including the defendant’s military service, and sentenced him to 840 months. He then appealed.

Factors Considered in Reviewing Sentences

On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court made two errors. First, the defendant asserted that the court incorrectly applied a sentencing enhancement based on a pattern of activity, citing that only two or three images involving the same victim at a similar time were used. Second, he contended that his military service should have been viewed as a mitigating factor in his sentence rather than an aggravating one. The court ultimately rejected his arguments and affirmed his sentence.

The court applied a two-step process to review the defendant’s sentence. First, they assessed the procedural soundness of the court’s process and found no significant errors. The defendant’s failure to object at sentencing prompted the court to conduct a review for plain error, which the defendant could not establish. As such, the court affirmed the district court’s application of the pattern-of-activity enhancement and its consideration of The defendant’s military service.

Second, the court examined the substantive reasonableness of the sentence and determined the defendant’s sentence fell within the reasonable range. Despite the defendant’s contention that his sentence was excessive, the court upheld it based on the severity of his crimes. They emphasized the egregious nature of child sex offenses and noted previous rulings supporting lengthy sentences for similar crimes. The defendant’s argument that a lesser sentence would be more appropriate did not sway the court, which found the court’s decision reasonable given the facts and circumstances. Thus, the court affirmed the defendant’s sentence, concluding that neither procedural nor substantive errors warranted reversal.

Meet with an Experienced Clearwater Attorney

Sex crimes typically carry significant sentences, especially when they involve children, but there are often arguments people accused of sex offenses can assert to avoid a conviction. If you are accused of a sex crime, it is in your best interest to meet with an attorney. The Clearwater sex crime defense attorneys of Hanlon Law can assess your case and aid you in pursuing the best legal result possible. You can contact Hanlon Law by using our online form or by calling us at 727-897-5413 to arrange a meeting.

Contact Information