SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 2
Download to read offline
Let us start this discussion by pointing out the obvious, seven people’s lives were
irreparably changed almost 7 years ago. Nothing will bring Sean Taylor back to life. His child
and the mother of that child will never hear him come home at the end of the day or feel the
happiness that he brought to complete their family.
Yesterday, a jury found one of the four people charged with Sean Taylor’s murder guilty
of second degree murder and armed burglary. Eric Rivera was 17 years old at the time of the
crime. Today, he is a 23 year old young man. The question now becomes, what punishment can
and should Eric Rivera receive?
A person convicted of second degree murder, under either Florida Statutes Section
782.04 (2) or (3), has been found guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable by
imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in section 775.082.
A person convicted of armed burglary under Florida Statutes Section 810.02(2)(b) has
also been found guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of
years not exceeding life or as provided in section 775.082.
The punishment for a felony of the first degree as set forth in Section 775.082(3)(b) is,
“For a felony of the first degree, by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 30 years or, when
specifically provided by statute, by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life
imprisonment.” Second degree murder and armed burglary specifically provide for a
punishment of “imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life.” Therefore, the maximum
term of imprisonment for Eric Rivera’s crimes of conviction is a term of years not exceeding life.
For most defendants, the discussion would end here. Calculate the defendant’s guideline
sentence under the Florida Criminal Punishment Code, factor in any statutory minimum
mandatory penalty and sentence him from the minimum up to life imprisonment. Florida
Statutes Section 775.087(2)(a)1d adds a 10 year minimum sentence when there is a possession of
a firearm but no discharge. The guideline range under the Florida Criminal Punishment Code is
approximately 17.3 years.
However, at the time that Eric Rivera committed his crime, he was still less than 18 years
old and therefore a juvenile. There is no question that juveniles must be treated differently under
the law. Children make poor decisions due to developmental, physical and emotional
immaturity. This is a topic that has been discussed in all 50 States and has been argued before
the United States Supreme Court. So what is the maximum penalty that Eric Rivera can receive
for his crimes of conviction?
In Miller v. Alabama, ––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), the United
States Supreme Court held that a mandatory life sentence without parole for capital murders
committed by juveniles—the only sentence allowed by section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes—
violated the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This ruling was extended by
several Florida District Courts of Appeal.
In Neely v. State, 2013 WL 1629227, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D 851 (Fla. 3d DCA Apr. 17,
2013), the Third District found that “Because Miller did not categorically bar a life sentence
without parole for a juvenile, this decision does not preclude the trial court from again imposing
a life term without possibility of parole should the trial court upon reconsideration deem such
sentence justified. See Washington, 103 So.3d at 920. However, “the trial court must conduct an
individualized examination of mitigating circumstances in considering the fairness of imposing
such a sentence.” Id.
This is the same approach that the Court had previously followed in Hernandez v. State,
117 So.3d 778 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); (“We adopt the measured approach of the majority in
Washington: Under Miller, a sentence of life without the possibility of parole remains a
constitutionally permissible sentencing option. A discourse by this Court on other sentencing
options is premature.... The better course calls for this Court to exercise restraint and for the
parties to make their case before the trial court, where testimony may be taken, evidence
presented, and argument made on all material issues to include the potential range of sentencing
options.”).
This issue was also addressed by the First and Fifth Districts with similar results, See
Walling v. State, 105 So.3d 660 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Partlow v. State, ––– So.3d ––––, 2013
WL 45743, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D94 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan.4, 2013); Washington v. State, 103 So.3d
917, 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Horsley v. State, 2013 WL 4605664, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D1862
(Fla. 5th DCA Aug. 30, 2013).
In fact, the discussion may not be over. The Courts in Partlow and Horsley certified the
question of whether or not the US Supreme Court’s decision in Miller revived the prior sentence
of life with parole eligibility after 25 years previously contained in section 775.082(1).
So where does this leave the Court in deciding what the maximum sentence is for Eric
Rivera? The answer, in my opinion, is that Eric Rivera can be sentenced to a term of years not
exceeding life.
As the law currently stands in the State of Florida, after conducting an “individualized
examination of mitigating circumstances in considering the fairness of imposing such a
sentence,” a Court can impose a life sentence upon a juvenile for a capital offense. By the same
reasoning, a Court that conducts the identical analysis for a juvenile convicted of committing a
crime that carries a statutory penalty of a term of years not exceeding life can therefore, if
appropriate, impose a life sentence.
That is not to say that a life sentence is the appropriate sentence for Eric Rivera. We
know very little about him, other than what was presented during the guilt phase of his trial. It is
up to his attorneys to present any mitigating circumstances during his sentencing, now scheduled
for early December. It is also relevant for the prosecution to present any aggravating factors.
After the close of that phase of the trial, the Court can fashion an appropriate sentence. Under
Miller and its progeny in Florida, it can be any sentence from at least 10 years up to one that
does not exceed life imprisonment.

More Related Content

What's hot

Relevancy of character.
Relevancy of character.Relevancy of character.
Relevancy of character.Suraj Sukre
 
Ch 19 Sentencing and Punishment
Ch 19 Sentencing and PunishmentCh 19 Sentencing and Punishment
Ch 19 Sentencing and Punishmentrharrisonaz
 
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)Intan Muhammad
 
John doeunit4
John doeunit4John doeunit4
John doeunit4pryorpa
 
character evidence in Malaysia
character evidence in Malaysiacharacter evidence in Malaysia
character evidence in MalaysiaIntan Muhammad
 
How to beat foreclosure
How to beat foreclosure How to beat foreclosure
How to beat foreclosure creditwrench
 
PLEG Portolio Project Final
PLEG Portolio Project FinalPLEG Portolio Project Final
PLEG Portolio Project FinalTania Wingard
 
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared ResourceLaw-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resourcelawexchange.co.uk
 
Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950Intan Muhammad
 
Sentencing theories 2012
Sentencing theories 2012Sentencing theories 2012
Sentencing theories 2012Miss Hart
 
Synoptic 2014 and Robbery
Synoptic 2014 and RobberySynoptic 2014 and Robbery
Synoptic 2014 and RobberyMiss Hart
 

What's hot (20)

Relevancy of character.
Relevancy of character.Relevancy of character.
Relevancy of character.
 
Ch 19 Sentencing and Punishment
Ch 19 Sentencing and PunishmentCh 19 Sentencing and Punishment
Ch 19 Sentencing and Punishment
 
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16  of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
Relevancy of evidence under section 14, 15, 16 of Evidence Act 1950 (2017-2018)
 
John doeunit4
John doeunit4John doeunit4
John doeunit4
 
092210 gov criminal trial 50m
092210 gov criminal trial 50m092210 gov criminal trial 50m
092210 gov criminal trial 50m
 
character evidence in Malaysia
character evidence in Malaysiacharacter evidence in Malaysia
character evidence in Malaysia
 
Sentencing
SentencingSentencing
Sentencing
 
Israel Antitrust Authority on Cartel Case Settlements
Israel Antitrust Authority on Cartel Case SettlementsIsrael Antitrust Authority on Cartel Case Settlements
Israel Antitrust Authority on Cartel Case Settlements
 
Defence of infancy
Defence of infancyDefence of infancy
Defence of infancy
 
How to beat foreclosure
How to beat foreclosure How to beat foreclosure
How to beat foreclosure
 
Civil Law
Civil LawCivil Law
Civil Law
 
PLEG Portolio Project Final
PLEG Portolio Project FinalPLEG Portolio Project Final
PLEG Portolio Project Final
 
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared ResourceLaw-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource
 
Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950
Relevancy of evidence under Section 7 of Evidence Act 1950
 
Sentencing theories 2012
Sentencing theories 2012Sentencing theories 2012
Sentencing theories 2012
 
USA v. Matt Beasley Complaint
USA v. Matt Beasley ComplaintUSA v. Matt Beasley Complaint
USA v. Matt Beasley Complaint
 
Synoptic 2014 and Robbery
Synoptic 2014 and RobberySynoptic 2014 and Robbery
Synoptic 2014 and Robbery
 
Presentation mens rea
Presentation mens reaPresentation mens rea
Presentation mens rea
 
(8) character evidence
(8) character evidence(8) character evidence
(8) character evidence
 
Defences (infancy)
Defences (infancy)Defences (infancy)
Defences (infancy)
 

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (16)

The spark.wpd
The spark.wpdThe spark.wpd
The spark.wpd
 
Dear facdl
Dear facdlDear facdl
Dear facdl
 
Football pool 2013 week five
Football pool 2013 week fiveFootball pool 2013 week five
Football pool 2013 week five
 
Football pool 2013 week three
Football pool 2013 week threeFootball pool 2013 week three
Football pool 2013 week three
 
Human trafficking training flyer 2013
Human trafficking training flyer 2013Human trafficking training flyer 2013
Human trafficking training flyer 2013
 
Football pool 2013 week nine
Football pool 2013 week nineFootball pool 2013 week nine
Football pool 2013 week nine
 
Football pool 2013 weel two final
Football pool 2013 weel two finalFootball pool 2013 weel two final
Football pool 2013 weel two final
 
Bar Letters
Bar LettersBar Letters
Bar Letters
 
Closeout tracy wilson 7655 xee
Closeout tracy wilson 7655 xeeCloseout tracy wilson 7655 xee
Closeout tracy wilson 7655 xee
 
Football pool 2013 week 8
Football pool 2013 week 8Football pool 2013 week 8
Football pool 2013 week 8
 
Football pool 2013 b
Football pool 2013 bFootball pool 2013 b
Football pool 2013 b
 
Football pool 2013 week seven
Football pool 2013 week sevenFootball pool 2013 week seven
Football pool 2013 week seven
 
Week 4 not final
Week 4 not finalWeek 4 not final
Week 4 not final
 
Football pool 2013 week six
Football pool 2013 week sixFootball pool 2013 week six
Football pool 2013 week six
 
2 d12 3535
2 d12 35352 d12 3535
2 d12 3535
 
Dcba bench and bar
Dcba  bench and barDcba  bench and bar
Dcba bench and bar
 

Similar to Sean Taylor murder case explores juvenile sentencing limits

PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docx
PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docxPLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docx
PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docxrandymartin91030
 
4 main sentencing goals.pdf
4 main sentencing goals.pdf4 main sentencing goals.pdf
4 main sentencing goals.pdfstudy help
 
Welcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourt
Welcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourtWelcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourt
Welcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourtNajahJacobs
 
291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx
291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx
291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docxrhetttrevannion
 
Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...
Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...
Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...guestc2745c
 
[Type text][Type text][Type text] 1Running Head Disci.docx
[Type text][Type text][Type text]   1Running Head Disci.docx[Type text][Type text][Type text]   1Running Head Disci.docx
[Type text][Type text][Type text] 1Running Head Disci.docxhanneloremccaffery
 
Running head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docx
Running head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docxRunning head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docx
Running head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docxsusanschei
 
Why Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docx
Why Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docxWhy Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docx
Why Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docxalanfhall8953
 
Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12
Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12
Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12mpalaro
 
MILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docx
MILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docxMILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docx
MILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docxannandleola
 
Douglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docx
Douglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docxDouglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docx
Douglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docxmadlynplamondon
 
Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003Callum Hughes
 
Salamat ansari and ors v state of up
Salamat ansari and ors v state of upSalamat ansari and ors v state of up
Salamat ansari and ors v state of upsabrangsabrang
 
Defendant’s Rights Name School.docx
    Defendant’s Rights    Name    School.docx    Defendant’s Rights    Name    School.docx
Defendant’s Rights Name School.docxhallettfaustina
 
Opinion grossman FL preemptory challenges
Opinion grossman FL preemptory challengesOpinion grossman FL preemptory challenges
Opinion grossman FL preemptory challengesmzamoralaw
 

Similar to Sean Taylor murder case explores juvenile sentencing limits (20)

PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docx
PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docxPLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docx
PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS THOROUGHLY….THERE ARE FOUR QUESTIONS.docx
 
4 main sentencing goals.pdf
4 main sentencing goals.pdf4 main sentencing goals.pdf
4 main sentencing goals.pdf
 
Welcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourt
Welcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourtWelcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourt
Welcome to Legal Research Writing and MootCourt
 
291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx
291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx
291CHAPTER 9 Chapter OutlineIntroductionDouble Jeopard.docx
 
Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...
Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...
Using Comparative Foreign Law In Constitutional And Other Adjudications By Na...
 
Juvenile Justice
Juvenile JusticeJuvenile Justice
Juvenile Justice
 
[Type text][Type text][Type text] 1Running Head Disci.docx
[Type text][Type text][Type text]   1Running Head Disci.docx[Type text][Type text][Type text]   1Running Head Disci.docx
[Type text][Type text][Type text] 1Running Head Disci.docx
 
Running head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docx
Running head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docxRunning head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docx
Running head Case study 1 – understanding the court system1Cas.docx
 
Why Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docx
Why Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docxWhy Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docx
Why Innocent People Plead GuiltyJed S. RakoffNovember 20, 20.docx
 
Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12
Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12
Constitutional Issues - Chapter 12
 
MILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docx
MILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docxMILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docx
MILLER v. ALABAMA CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF.docx
 
Douglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docx
Douglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docxDouglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docx
Douglas E. Metzger was convicted in the municipal court of the cit.docx
 
Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
Consent in Sexual Offences since the Enactment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
 
Salamat ansari and ors v state of up
Salamat ansari and ors v state of upSalamat ansari and ors v state of up
Salamat ansari and ors v state of up
 
OOP Memo
OOP MemoOOP Memo
OOP Memo
 
Judicial precedent
Judicial precedentJudicial precedent
Judicial precedent
 
Rinehart LR Final
Rinehart LR FinalRinehart LR Final
Rinehart LR Final
 
Rule of Law Day
Rule of Law DayRule of Law Day
Rule of Law Day
 
Defendant’s Rights Name School.docx
    Defendant’s Rights    Name    School.docx    Defendant’s Rights    Name    School.docx
Defendant’s Rights Name School.docx
 
Opinion grossman FL preemptory challenges
Opinion grossman FL preemptory challengesOpinion grossman FL preemptory challenges
Opinion grossman FL preemptory challenges
 

More from Justicebuilding

2015 week five b pool copy
2015 week five b pool  copy2015 week five b pool  copy
2015 week five b pool copyJusticebuilding
 
Dcba may 2015 lunch and learn
Dcba   may 2015 lunch and learnDcba   may 2015 lunch and learn
Dcba may 2015 lunch and learnJusticebuilding
 
Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015
Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015
Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015Justicebuilding
 
Order on motion for post conviction relief
Order on motion for post conviction reliefOrder on motion for post conviction relief
Order on motion for post conviction reliefJusticebuilding
 
Tgk.director guevara.ltr
Tgk.director guevara.ltrTgk.director guevara.ltr
Tgk.director guevara.ltrJusticebuilding
 
Dcba lunch and learn- jan. 2015
Dcba  lunch and learn- jan. 2015Dcba  lunch and learn- jan. 2015
Dcba lunch and learn- jan. 2015Justicebuilding
 
Order granting omnibus order granting defendants motions for sanctions
 Order granting omnibus order granting defendants  motions for sanctions Order granting omnibus order granting defendants  motions for sanctions
Order granting omnibus order granting defendants motions for sanctionsJusticebuilding
 
Hate mail from facdl member 2
Hate mail from facdl member 2Hate mail from facdl member 2
Hate mail from facdl member 2Justicebuilding
 

More from Justicebuilding (20)

2015 week five b pool copy
2015 week five b pool  copy2015 week five b pool  copy
2015 week five b pool copy
 
Pool 2015 week five
Pool 2015 week five Pool 2015 week five
Pool 2015 week five
 
2015 week three b pool
2015 week three b pool 2015 week three b pool
2015 week three b pool
 
Pool 2015 week three
Pool 2015 week threePool 2015 week three
Pool 2015 week three
 
Pool 2015 week two
Pool 2015 week twoPool 2015 week two
Pool 2015 week two
 
Pool 2015 week one
Pool 2015 week one Pool 2015 week one
Pool 2015 week one
 
Pool 2015 week one
Pool 2015 week one Pool 2015 week one
Pool 2015 week one
 
Dcba may 2015 lunch and learn
Dcba   may 2015 lunch and learnDcba   may 2015 lunch and learn
Dcba may 2015 lunch and learn
 
Mb cops
Mb cops Mb cops
Mb cops
 
Schwartz order
Schwartz orderSchwartz order
Schwartz order
 
Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015
Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015
Monroe post office invite may 18, 2015
 
2 d11 5805 opinion
2 d11 5805 opinion 2 d11 5805 opinion
2 d11 5805 opinion
 
Order on motion for post conviction relief
Order on motion for post conviction reliefOrder on motion for post conviction relief
Order on motion for post conviction relief
 
Jackie's apology 2
Jackie's apology 2Jackie's apology 2
Jackie's apology 2
 
Tgk.director guevara.ltr
Tgk.director guevara.ltrTgk.director guevara.ltr
Tgk.director guevara.ltr
 
Dcba lunch and learn- jan. 2015
Dcba  lunch and learn- jan. 2015Dcba  lunch and learn- jan. 2015
Dcba lunch and learn- jan. 2015
 
Order granting omnibus order granting defendants motions for sanctions
 Order granting omnibus order granting defendants  motions for sanctions Order granting omnibus order granting defendants  motions for sanctions
Order granting omnibus order granting defendants motions for sanctions
 
Hate mail from facdl member 2
Hate mail from facdl member 2Hate mail from facdl member 2
Hate mail from facdl member 2
 
Pool 2014 week 10
Pool 2014 week 10Pool 2014 week 10
Pool 2014 week 10
 
Pool 2014 week 9
Pool 2014 week 9Pool 2014 week 9
Pool 2014 week 9
 

Sean Taylor murder case explores juvenile sentencing limits

  • 1. Let us start this discussion by pointing out the obvious, seven people’s lives were irreparably changed almost 7 years ago. Nothing will bring Sean Taylor back to life. His child and the mother of that child will never hear him come home at the end of the day or feel the happiness that he brought to complete their family. Yesterday, a jury found one of the four people charged with Sean Taylor’s murder guilty of second degree murder and armed burglary. Eric Rivera was 17 years old at the time of the crime. Today, he is a 23 year old young man. The question now becomes, what punishment can and should Eric Rivera receive? A person convicted of second degree murder, under either Florida Statutes Section 782.04 (2) or (3), has been found guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in section 775.082. A person convicted of armed burglary under Florida Statutes Section 810.02(2)(b) has also been found guilty of a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in section 775.082. The punishment for a felony of the first degree as set forth in Section 775.082(3)(b) is, “For a felony of the first degree, by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 30 years or, when specifically provided by statute, by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment.” Second degree murder and armed burglary specifically provide for a punishment of “imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life.” Therefore, the maximum term of imprisonment for Eric Rivera’s crimes of conviction is a term of years not exceeding life. For most defendants, the discussion would end here. Calculate the defendant’s guideline sentence under the Florida Criminal Punishment Code, factor in any statutory minimum mandatory penalty and sentence him from the minimum up to life imprisonment. Florida Statutes Section 775.087(2)(a)1d adds a 10 year minimum sentence when there is a possession of a firearm but no discharge. The guideline range under the Florida Criminal Punishment Code is approximately 17.3 years. However, at the time that Eric Rivera committed his crime, he was still less than 18 years old and therefore a juvenile. There is no question that juveniles must be treated differently under the law. Children make poor decisions due to developmental, physical and emotional immaturity. This is a topic that has been discussed in all 50 States and has been argued before the United States Supreme Court. So what is the maximum penalty that Eric Rivera can receive for his crimes of conviction? In Miller v. Alabama, ––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), the United States Supreme Court held that a mandatory life sentence without parole for capital murders committed by juveniles—the only sentence allowed by section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes— violated the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This ruling was extended by several Florida District Courts of Appeal. In Neely v. State, 2013 WL 1629227, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D 851 (Fla. 3d DCA Apr. 17, 2013), the Third District found that “Because Miller did not categorically bar a life sentence without parole for a juvenile, this decision does not preclude the trial court from again imposing
  • 2. a life term without possibility of parole should the trial court upon reconsideration deem such sentence justified. See Washington, 103 So.3d at 920. However, “the trial court must conduct an individualized examination of mitigating circumstances in considering the fairness of imposing such a sentence.” Id. This is the same approach that the Court had previously followed in Hernandez v. State, 117 So.3d 778 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); (“We adopt the measured approach of the majority in Washington: Under Miller, a sentence of life without the possibility of parole remains a constitutionally permissible sentencing option. A discourse by this Court on other sentencing options is premature.... The better course calls for this Court to exercise restraint and for the parties to make their case before the trial court, where testimony may be taken, evidence presented, and argument made on all material issues to include the potential range of sentencing options.”). This issue was also addressed by the First and Fifth Districts with similar results, See Walling v. State, 105 So.3d 660 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Partlow v. State, ––– So.3d ––––, 2013 WL 45743, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D94 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan.4, 2013); Washington v. State, 103 So.3d 917, 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Horsley v. State, 2013 WL 4605664, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D1862 (Fla. 5th DCA Aug. 30, 2013). In fact, the discussion may not be over. The Courts in Partlow and Horsley certified the question of whether or not the US Supreme Court’s decision in Miller revived the prior sentence of life with parole eligibility after 25 years previously contained in section 775.082(1). So where does this leave the Court in deciding what the maximum sentence is for Eric Rivera? The answer, in my opinion, is that Eric Rivera can be sentenced to a term of years not exceeding life. As the law currently stands in the State of Florida, after conducting an “individualized examination of mitigating circumstances in considering the fairness of imposing such a sentence,” a Court can impose a life sentence upon a juvenile for a capital offense. By the same reasoning, a Court that conducts the identical analysis for a juvenile convicted of committing a crime that carries a statutory penalty of a term of years not exceeding life can therefore, if appropriate, impose a life sentence. That is not to say that a life sentence is the appropriate sentence for Eric Rivera. We know very little about him, other than what was presented during the guilt phase of his trial. It is up to his attorneys to present any mitigating circumstances during his sentencing, now scheduled for early December. It is also relevant for the prosecution to present any aggravating factors. After the close of that phase of the trial, the Court can fashion an appropriate sentence. Under Miller and its progeny in Florida, it can be any sentence from at least 10 years up to one that does not exceed life imprisonment.