Casey Anthony's Sentence: The Talking Heads Don't Know What They're Talking About

Casey Anthony booking photograph (Credit: Orange County Jail)

On July 5, 2011, a jury acquitted Casey Anthony of the murder of her infant daughter Caylee, but convicted Anthony of four misdemeanor counts of making false statements to law enforcement. Anthony had been held in jail since 2008 awaiting trial. Circuit Judge Belvin Perry, who presided over the trial, imposed the maximum sentence he could, four consecutive one-year sentences in the Orange County Jail, with credit for time served, and estimated that her release date would be in late July or early August. Judge Perry also imposed the maximum fine of $1,000 per count, for a total of $4,000.

Some defense lawyer talking heads took the position that Anthony had already fulfilled more than her maximum sentence and should be released immediately. Timothy Fitzgerald, a defense lawyer in Tampa, Florida solemnly explained to WFLA reporter Natalie Shepherd that “Each day you’re in you get a day of credit for each of the charges.” Tampa defense attorney Jeff Brown went even farther, making outrageous assertions to 970 WFLA’s Matt McClain in a 30 minute interview (since pulled from that station) on July 7th that Casey Anthony is currently out of jail and is a free woman, saying Florida law doesn’t allow for her to continue to be held, that he’s checked with legal experts and even law enforcement members, and that they all believe the judge is protecting Anthony’s safety with a fake release date.

Screenshot of Newsradio 970 WFLA Facebook page announcing and
summarizing the interview  with defense attorney Jeff Brown

Respectfully, both Fitzgerald and Brown are completely wrong on the law. The correct rule is that if convicted of multiple offenses, the defendant must be given credit only on the first of consecutive sentences: When consecutive sentences are imposed, the defendant is not entitled to have his or her jail time pyramided by being given credit on each sentence for the full time he or she spends in jail awaiting disposition.¹ In other words, jail time need not be applied to all consecutive sentences,² and a defendant does not earn concurrent jail credit against consecutive sentences.

In computing Anthony’s jail sentence, the officials in the Inmate Records Section of the Orange County Jail will take the total sentence imposed (365 X 4 = 1,460 days), and then subtract the number of days Anthony has actually been held in custody on the misdemeanor charges, the number of days credit she has earned in that time, and any other applicable discount (e.g., for overcrowding at the jail). The end result will be that Casey Anthony will be required to serve considerably less than four calendar years in jail.

NOTES:

¹ Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1986).

² See, Bell v. State, 573 So. 2d 10 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 5th Dist. 1990); Gillespie v. State, 910 So. 2d 322 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 5th Dist. 2005).

Consequences of a Defendant's Failure to Abide by a Plea Agreement

The legal consequences of a defendant’s failure to abide by a plea agreement are profound and well-defined under Florida law.

Defendants who freely and voluntarily enter into a plea agreement with the State are required to abide by the terms of that agreement; if they do not, the State can move under Rule 3.170(g) to have the court vacate the plea and corresponding sentence.[1] Once a defendant reneges on the plea agreement, the State has the option of withdrawing from the agreement, and either going to trial or seeking a new agreement.[2] If a criminal defendant does not feel so bound by the terms of a plea agreement that he or she will comply with it, then the State is likewise not bound.[3]

Misdemeanors, Felonies and Common Law Crimes in Florida

Those who do not practice criminal law in the courts of Florida are often confused as to the differences in severity between misdemeanors and felonies, and between differing severity classes within those categories. Very few people understand what a common law crime under Florida law is. A good number of people who read this blog have told me that they do not fully understand the various classes of criminal offenses and how they differ, e.g., the difference in potential punishment between a third degree felony and a first degree felony. This post is meant to serve as a primer on the classes of offenses under Florida law.

In Florida, almost all criminal offenses are divided by severity into the two broad categories of misdemeanors and felonies. A third, very small, category is that of common law crimes which have attributes of each of the other two categories. County courts have original jurisdiction in all misdemeanor cases not cognizable by the circuit courts.[1] Circuit courts have jurisdiction, inter alia, of all felonies and of all misdemeanors arising out of the same circumstances as a felony which is also charged.[2] The circuit court also has original jurisdiction in all cases relating to juveniles except traffic offenses as provided in chapters 316 (State Uniform Traffic Control) and 985 (Delinquency), Florida Statutes, and exclusive original jurisdiction of proceedings in which a child is alleged to have committed a delinquent act or violation of law.[3] Juvenile cases are, however, processed separately from adult cases.[4] The Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rules of Evidence apply uniformly to both classes of offenses.

What Is a "Reverse Split Sentence"?

Last week, while giving a group of judges a class on sentencing law, it came to my attention that few of the judges present had ever heard of "reverse split sentencing," which is one of the statutory sentencing options available to Florida judges. Upon further inquiry, I discovered that few prosecutors or defense attorneys had heard of it either. This is unfortunate, because this sentencing option can be very appropriate -- especially in a case where the defendant has little criminal history, restitution owed the victim or victims is substantial, and the court needs a real hammer to get the defendant to comply with the terms of supervision.

A “reverse split sentence” is one whereby the defendant is sentenced to a term of probation which may be followed by a period of incarceration or, with respect to a felony, into community control, as follows:

- If the defendant meets the terms and conditions of probation or community control, any term of incarceration may be modified by court order to eliminate the term of incarceration.[1] A defendant upon whom a reverse split sentence is imposed may petition the sentencing court at any time prior to the start of the incarcerative portion of the sentence with a request to eliminate or reduce that portion of the sentence, but the court is under no obligation to grant such a request.

- If the defendant does not meet the terms and conditions of probation or community control, the court may revoke, modify, or continue the probation or community control as provided in section 948.06. If the probation or community control is revoked, the court may impose any sentence that it could have imposed at the time the defendant was placed on probation or community control. The court may not provide credit for time served for any portion of a probation or community control term toward a subsequent term of probation or community control. However, the court may not impose a subsequent term of probation or community control which, when combined with any amount of time served on preceding terms of probation or community control for offenses pending before the court for sentencing, would exceed the maximum penalty allowable as provided in section 775.082. Such term of incarceration must be served under applicable law or county ordinance governing service of sentences in state or county jurisdiction. This does not prohibit the court from imposing any other sanction provided by law.[2]

Alternative Sentencing: Youthful Offender Downward Departures

A “youthful offender” (YO) is any person who is sentenced as such by the court or is classified as such by the Department of Corrections pursuant to section 958.04.[FN1] There are two ways by which a defendant can become entitled to the benefits of the YO statute. Either the trial court can sentence the defendant as a YO, or the Department of Corrections can designate a defendant who was sentenced as an adult to be a YO.[FN2]

Qualification

Pursuant to section 958.04, F.S., the court may sentence as a YO any person:

(a) Who is at least 18 years of age or who has been transferred for prosecution to the criminal division of the circuit court pursuant to chapter 985;

(b) Who is found guilty of or who has tendered, and the court has accepted, a plea of nolo contendere or guilty to a crime that is, under the laws of this state, a felony if the offender is younger than 21 years of age at the time sentence is imposed; and

(c) Who has not previously been classified as a youthful offender under the provisions of chapter 985; however, a person who has been found guilty of a capital or life felony may not be sentenced as a YO under the Youthful Offender Act.

Chemical Castration for Rapists

Chemical castration is the use of hormonal medication used to suppress the sexual drive. It is used mainly by countries as a preventive measure or punishment on people who violate their laws on sexual behavior. The term “chemical castration” is a misnomer: It should be more appropriately called “hormonal androgen depletion” or “anti-hormone treatment.” Its effects are completely reversible. Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), the drug mandated by the Florida Legislature for use in chemical castrations, is more commonly known as Depo-Provera. In men, the drug reduces the production of the hormone testosterone in the testes and the adrenal glands, and, therefore, reduces the level of testosterone circulating through the bloodstream. As testosterone levels drop, so does the putative sex drive in most men. The physiological effects of Depo-Provera thus include temporary diminution of erections and ejaculations and a reduction in sperm count.

Sentencing Multipliers Under the Criminal Punishment Code: Use of Juvenile Priors for the Grand Theft Motor Vehicle Multiplier

There is a lot of misunderstanding about sentencing multipliers under Florida's Criminal Punishment Code, particularly when it comes to the Grand Theft Motor Vehicle multiplier and the use of juvenile priors as predicate offenses.

The Grand Theft Motor Vehicle multiplier is applicable where the primary offense charged is grand theft of a motor vehicle and the defendant's prior record includes three more grand thefts of a motor vehicle. The confusion is usually over whether juvenile priors can be used as predicate offenses, and if so, whether or not there has to have been an adjudication of delinquency. Typical is the following question I received a few days ago from an Assistant State Attorney in the 15th Circuit, reproduced verbatim: