Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...If the court finds that life imprisonment is not an appropriate sentence, such person shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of at least 40 years. A person sentenced pursuant to this subparagraph is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(a)....

...the court in accordance with s. 921.1401, the court finds that life imprisonment is an appropriate sentence. A person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 15 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(c). Ch. 2014-220, § 1, Laws of Fla. The session law also created section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2017), which provides, in pertinent part: (2)(a) A juvenile offender sentenced under s....

...The court subsequently held a resentencing hearing on the first-degree murder conviction pursuant to section 921.1401, Florida Statutes (2016), and again sentenced Williams to life imprisonment, but with a sentence review in twenty-five years, as required by section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2016)....

...If the court finds that life imprisonment is not an appropriate sentence, such person shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of at least 40 years. A person sentenced pursuant to this subparagraph is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(a)....

...court in accordance with s. 921.1401, the court finds that life imprisonment is an appropriate sentence. A person who *288 is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 15 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(c)....

...attempted to kill the victim results in a minimum sentence of forty years' imprisonment under subsection (1)(b)1. Without this finding, the trial court is not required to impose a minimum sentence. See § 775.082(1)(b) 2., Fla. Stat. Further, under section 921.1402, a finding of actual killing, intent to kill, or attempt to kill entitles a juvenile offender to a sentence review in twenty-five years, whereas without the finding, the juvenile offender is entitled to a sentence review in fifteen years (provided the trial court imposes a sentence greater than fifteen years). § 921.1402(2)(a), (c), Fla....

...United States Constitution as delineated by the United States Supreme Court in Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), and Virginia v. LeBlanc, 137 S. Ct. 1726 (2017). Therefore, such juvenile offenders are not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. BACKGROUND Budry Michel was charged with first-degree murder, armed robbery, armed kidnapping, and attempted armed robbery in the shooting death of Lynette Grames and robbery of Adnan Shafi Dada....

...parole after 25 years under Florida’s parole system do not violate “Graham’s requirement that juveniles . . . have a meaningful opportunity to receive parole.” LeBlanc, 137 S. Ct. at 1729. Therefore, such juvenile offenders are not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...discretion to impose a term of years sentence as low as forty years’ imprisonment. See § 775.082(1)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2017). Moreover, and importantly, Atwell would be entitled to review of his sentence after twenty-five years’ imprisonment. See § 921.1402(2)(a), Fla....

...Atwell’s sentence review hearing would be presided over by a trial judge, and would include his presence with an attorney, and the ability to present pertinent information to prove his entitlement to release based on maturity and rehabilitation. Id. § 921.1402 (5)-(6). Michel, by contrast, will remain sentenced to life in prison, being entitled to review of his sentence after twenty-five years, at a hearing presided over by the parole commission....

...2014) (observing that this Court has, “prior to any directly applicable 5. I would strongly urge the Legislature to look at the implications of the plurality’s decision to determine whether amendments are warranted to chapter 2014-220, sections 2-3, Laws of Florida. See §§ 921.1401, 921.1402, Fla....

...[and] [i]n this jurisdiction, sentencing is a joint exercise by the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.” James, 59 A.3d at 1238. Following Miller, the Florida Legislature created a new and separate system of judicial review, specific to juveniles. See § 921.1402, Fla....

...eview of their - 26 - sentences at twenty-five years. See § 775.082(1)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2017). This judicial review includes a hearing, where the juvenile is “entitled to be represented by counsel.” § 921.1402(5), Fla. Stat. (2017). Additionally, a trial court will determine whether the juvenile is entitled to resentencing or early release. Id. § 921.1402(6)....

...physical, or emotional abuse before he or she committed the offense. - 27 -  (i) The results of any mental health assessment, risk assessment, or evaluation of the juvenile offender as to rehabilitation. Id. § 921.1402(6)....

...er. See Atwell v. State, 128 So.3d 167, 169 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). We remand this case for resentenc-ing on the first-degree murder count in conformance with chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, which has been codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 of the *1043 Florida Statutes....

...of the victim or the victim’s next of kin concerning .the release of the juvenile offender from prison, and whether the juvenile offender remains at the same level of risk to society as he or she did at the time of the initial sentencing. But see § 921.1402(2)(a),: Fla....

...for evaluation, specifically tailored to juveniles and-based on the Miller factors. Id. Also, at the judicial sentence review hearing tinder chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, the trial court is required to consider the enumerated Miller' factors of section 921.1402(6), Florida Statutes,' along with any other factor it deems appropriate to review the juvenile’s sentence. See § 921.1402(6), Fla....

...He now asks this Court to vacate those sentences and remand for resentencing under section 775.082(3)(c), Florida Statutes, in light of the Florida Supreme Court’s recent decision in Henry v. State, 175 So.3d 675 (2015), so that he may benefit from the new sentence review mechanism of sections 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...statute to a Gra- /iam-eligible defendant, he is not entitled to the benefit of the new sentence review statute because his previous convictions for another separate armed robbery and conspiracy to commit armed robbery disen-title him to relief. See § 921.1402(2)(a), Fla....

...Hall’s scoresheet indicated a lowest permissible sentence of 369.15 months in prison and a statutory maximum sentence of life in prison. He was sentenced to fifty-five years in prison, to be followed by life on probation, with a chance for judicial review after fifteen years pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014). II. In reviewing a trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress, "[t]he standard of review for the trial judge's factual findings is whether competent substantial ev...

...defendant to any term between the lowest permissible sentence and the statutory maximum. Furthermore, in response to Graham and Miller, the Florida Legislature adopted chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, which has been codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, of the Florida Statutes....

...ence that was less than life in prison but well beyond the 369.15-month lowest permissible sentence. Finally, as noted, the trial court entered an order that Hall would be eligible for review of his sentence after fifteen years in prison pursuant to section 921.1402(c), Florida Statutes. At that time, the trial court will once again take into account Hall’s “age, maturity, and psychological development at the time of the offense” when deciding whether to modify the sentence and allow Hall’s early release. See § 921.1402(6)(f), Fla....

...the court from considering Hall’s youth. Cf. Montgomery v. State, 230 So. 3d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (twenty-five year mandatory minimum sentence imposed on juvenile defendant for discharging firearm not unconstitutional if the defendant is granted judicial review provided by section 921.1402 after twenty years). IV. Given the facts of this case, we conclude based on the totality of the circumstances that the record supports the trial court’s determination that Hall knowingly and intelligently waived his constitutional rights....

...1 Appellant committed this offense in 2011 when he was 17 years old. Appellant raises three issues in this direct appeal. First, he contends that his judgment and sentence should be amended to reflect that he is entitled to a review of his sentence after 15 years under section 921.1402(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2014)....

...does not amount to a life without parole sentence even though the juvenile will be in his late sixties when he is released from prison). We affirm the first issue because, absent a violation of Graham , there is no legal basis to retroactively apply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing legislation enacted in 2014) to the 2011 offense in this case....

...v. Kentucky ], 492 U.S. [361] at 395, 109 S.Ct. 2969 [ 106 L.Ed.2d 306 (1989) ])). The Henry Court ordered the case to be' remanded for resentencing in accordance with Florida’s 2014 juvenile sentencing legislation codified in sections 775.082 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...921.1401 and finds that life imprisonment or a term of years equal to life imprisonment is an appropriate sentence. ' A person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 20 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(d). Section 921.1402(2)(d), provides: Review of sentences for persons convicted of specified offenses while under the age of 18 years....

...at 2469. Even in a discretionary sentencing scheme, the sentencing court’s exercise of discretion before imposing a life sentence must be informed by consideration of the juvenile offender’s “youth and its attendant circumstances” as articulated in OUTLINED IN SECTIONS 775.082, 921.1401, AND 921.1402 FLORIDA STATUTES (2014), TO JUVENILES CONVICTED OF SECOND-DEGREE MURDER AND SENTENCED TO A NON- MANDATORY SENTENCE OF LIFE IN PRISON BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CHAPTER 2014-220, LAWS OF FLORIDA? Landrum, 163 So....

...3d 954 (Fla. 2015), Laisha Landrum, a sixteen year old convicted of the lesser offense of second-degree murder, must also be resentenced and given opportunity for judicial review of that sentence at the statutorily mandated period of twenty-five years. See § 921.1402(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2014). We therefore quash the Second District’s decision and remand this case for resentencing in conformance with sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes, and disapprove Lightsey v....

...For those offenders in this category who “did not actually kill, intend to kill, or attempt to kill,” the subsequent judicial review is available for a sentence of more than fifteen years. Id. at 404 (internal citations omitted). See §§ 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Fla....

...- 15 -  (i) The effect, if any, of characteristics attributable to the defendant’s youth on the defendant’s judgment. (j) The possibility of rehabilitating the defendant. § 921.1401(2), Fla. Stat. (2014). Section 921.1402 additionally provides the relevant factors a court should consider during a “sentence review hearing to determine whether the juvenile offender’s sentence should be modified.” § 921.1402(6), Fla. Stat. (2014). One of those factors is “Whether the juvenile offender’s age, maturity, and psychological development at the time of the offense affected his or her behavior.” § 921.1402(6)(f), Fla....

...This sentencing legislation was “designed to bring Florida’s juvenile sentencing statutes into compliance with the United States Supreme Court’s recent Eighth Amendment juvenile sentencing jurisprudence.” Horsley, 160 So. 3d at 39; §§ 775.082, 921.1401, 921.1402, Fla....

...4th DCA 2014), and Starks v. - 24 - State, 128 So. 3d 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013), to the extent that they are inconsistent with this opinion. We remand for resentencing in accordance with sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statues (2014). It is so ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, and PERRY, JJ., concur. POLSTON, J., concurs in result. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. Applicati...

...The defendant challenges an order denying his rule 3.800 motion for resentencing on two consecutive sentences in separate and unrelated cases, a non-homicide and a homicide. The defendant argues that his combined term of sixty-five years violates section 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes (2018)....

...sentencing them to a lifetime in prison.” Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 480 (2012). In response to Graham and Miller, the Florida Legislature enacted chapter 2014–220, Laws of Florida, which has been codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...would have taken place in 2010 for the non-homicide offense. However, he completed that term in 2003, and began to serve the homicide sentence. For the homicide offense, the statutory review would have taken place in 2016, twenty five years after the 1991 sentence. § 921.1402, Fla....

of Mr. Copeland’s sentence after 25 years. See § 921.1402(2)(a), Fla. Stat. After sentencing, Mr

...2015) ], which applied the new sentence review statute to a Graham-eligible defendant, he is not entitled to the benefit of the new sentence review statute because his previous convictions for another separate armed robbery and conspiracy to -commit armed robbery disentitle him to relief. See § 921.1402(2)(a), Fla....

...er than twenty years, are entitled to judicial review. We therefore hold that all juveniles who have sentences that violate Graham are entitled to resentencing pursuant to chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014)....

...Furthermore, because Appellant’s sentence is both legal and constitutional, as it is not a de facto life sentence, we must respectfully disagree with the concurring opinion, as Appellant is not entitled to resentencing under - sections 775.082(3)(c) and 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes....

...opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.” 560 U.S. at 75. In response to Graham, the Florida Legislature enacted chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, which has been codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes. Chapter 2014-220 requires that juvenile offenders who commit offenses after July 1, 2014 receive a review hearing and an opportunity for early release after serving 15, 20, or 25 years depending on the crime committed and...

...a 30-year or shorter sentence. In Abrakata v. State, 168 So. 3d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), a juvenile offender who received a 25-year sentence for non- homicide offenses argued that his sentence violated Graham and that he was entitled to review under section 921.1402(2)(c). The First District concluded that the sentence did not violate Graham and without a Graham violation, section 921.1402 did not apply retroactively....

...murder in the mid-1990s, when Miller became the law, Florida needed to revise its laws for future cases. The revisions were made during the 2014 legislative session. Ch. 14- 220, § 3 at 2873, Laws of Fla. The bulk of those revisions are now codified as sections 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014)....

...physical, or emotional abuse before he or she committed the offense. (i) The results of any mental health assessment, risk assessment, or evaluation of the juvenile offender as to rehabilitation. § 921.1402(6), Fla....

...develop and implement objective parole guidelines as the criteria on which parole decisions are made. Our record does not reflect whether the guidelines applicable at the time of Mr. Howard's last hearing included criteria comparable to those now used by circuit courts under section 921.1402.1 If the objective parole guidelines were deficient in this manner, then Mr....

...Howard may stand out for his exceptional record in prison, he is likely to be one of a number of prisoners who have been denied parole while serving sentences of life with the possibility of parole under guidelines that did not 1 It should be noted that the twenty-five-year review under section 921.1402 is not available for certain prisoners who had already committed serious offenses before they committed murder. See 921.1402(2)(a), Fla....

...0(b)(2), arguing that he is a juvenile offender and entitled tó a juvenile sentencing hearing and judicial review hearing in accordance with the procedures outlined in chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, codified in sections 776.082, '921.1401, and' 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014), for the attempted robbery, aggravated battery, and attempted felony murder convictions....

...The trial court agreed in part-, and ordered a new sentencing hearing for those three convictions. After the heai’ing, the State submitted a memorandum of law, conceding that Montgomery was entitled to a review of his sentence after twenty years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d)....

...Montgomery filed a second rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, asking the court to vacate his sentences for those three convictions and to hold a juvenile sentencing hearing,under section 775.082(3)(c), and make the necessary findings in accordance with sections 921.1401 and 921.1402 that he is a juvenile offender and entitled to a sentencing review hearing after twenty years....

...2 We reverse Montgomery’s' sentences for "attempted robbery with a firearm, aggravated battery with a firearm, and attempted felony murder with a firearm and remand for resentencing in conformance with the 2014 juvenile sentencing statutes, which includes the judicial review provided by section 921.1402....

...In recognition of this difference and in response to the United States Supreme Court’s. decisions, the Florida Legislature passed chapter 2014-220 in 2014. See Horsley, 160 So.3d at 394 . The preamble to this chapter reflects that section 775.082 was amended, and sections 921.1401 and 921.1402 were created, to change the “criminal penalties applicable to ......

...The sentencing scheme established in chapter 2014-220 provides, in relevant part, that juveniles convicted of nonhomicide offenses and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than twenty years are entitled to a review of their sentences- after twenty years. §§ 775.082(3)(c), 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

...teristics at the time of the offense, whether the juvenile offender demonstrates maturity and rehabilitation, and whether the juvenile offender remains at the same level of risk to society as he or she did at the time of the initial sentencing. Id. § 921.1402(6)....

...provision may be viewed as the clearest and most recent expression of legislative intent.” Palm Beach Cty. Canvassing Bd. v. Harris, 772 So.2d 1273, 1287 (Fla. 2000); see also Fla. Virtual Sch. v. K12, Inc., 148 So.3d 97, 102 (Fla. 2014). These principles thus require that if there is a conflict, sections 775.082 and 921.1402, which are more recent and specifically address the criminal penalties and sentence review procedures applicable to juveniles convicted of certain serious offenses, would prevail over section 775.087(2)(a), which is older and is a general se...

...has been rehabilitated and is reasonably believed to be fit to reenter society, the court is authorized to modify the sentence by releasing the juvenile based on maturity and rehabilitation but must impose a term of probation of at least five years. § 921.1402(7), Fla....

...Under section 775.082(3), the court must provide a nonhomicide juvenile offender, who is convicted of certain serious offenses, an individualized sentencing hearing. If the nonhomicide juvenile offender is sentenced to more than twenty years, the court must provide a judicial review after twenty years, pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), to afford him or her a meaningful opportunity to obtain early release....

...icted death or great bodily harm, the juvenile must be sentenced to a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum. § 775.087(2), Fla. Stat. (2012). Nonetheless, he or she would still be entitled to a twenty-year statutory review of his or her sentence under section 921.1402(2)(d) with the possibility of early release....

...2015) (reversing juvenile nonhomicide offender’s aggregate seventy-year sentence with twenty-five-year mandatory minimum because it failed to provide defendant with judicial review, and thereby, meaningful opportunity for future release). At that judicial review, after considering the enumerated factors of section 921.1402(6) along with any other factor it deems appropriate to review the juvenile’s sentence, the sentencing court is authorized to modify the sentence and impose a term of probation of at least five years if the court determines modification is warranted. § 921.1402(7), Fla....

...or resentencing for the attempted robbery with a firearm, aggravated battery with a firearm, and attempted felony murder with a firearm convictions in conformance with chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, as codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014)....

...ten-year mandatory minimum under section 775.087(2). Young v. State, 219 So.3d 206, 210-11 (Fla. 5th DC.A 2017). That case is distinguishable because no juvenile offender is entitled to a review hearing unless his sentence exceeds fifteen years. See § 921.1402(2)(c), Fla....

....” 175 So.3d at 673. In both Henry and Gridine , the Florida Supreme Court held that the defendants should be resentenced under the sentencing provisions enacted in Chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, and codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes....

...1st DCA 2015), petition for discretionary review pending, No. SC15-1325 (Fla.2015), *549 the court held that a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence was not a de facto life sentence without parole in violation of Graham. Id. at 251-52 . Further, the Abrakata court refused to retroactively apply section 921.1402, which by its terms applies to offenses committed on or after July 1, 2014. Id. at 252 (“[Ajbsent a violation of Graham , there is no legal basis to retroactively apply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing legislation enacted in 2014) to the 2011 offense in this case.”)....

...0 years are entitled to sentence review. § 775.082(3)(c). During sentencing review, the court is permitted to modify the sentence. Such juveniles are entitled to review after 20 years and, if not resen-tenced, again 10 years after the first review. § 921.1402(2)(d)....

...kill, or attempted to kill the victim. For example, in Appellant’s situation, because he attempted to kill the victim, he would be entitled to sentence review after 25 years *551 if this new statute applied to his sentence. §§ 775.082(3)(a)5.a, 921.1402(2)(b). Importantly, however, the Legislature has expressly provided that these sentence review provisions apply only to juvenile non-homicide offenders who committed their offenses on or after July 1, 2014. § 921.1402(1), Fla....

...On the other hand, the First' District Court of Appeal in Abrakata refused to retroactively apply the sentence review provisions to non-homicide offenses committed after July 1, 2014. 168 So.3d at 252 . “[A]bsent a violation of Graham , there is no legal basis to retroactively ap *552 ply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing legislation enacted in 2014) to the 2011 offense in this case.” Id....

...In 2014, however, the Florida Legislature enacted new statutes for sentencing juveniles convicted as adults. Ch. 2014-220, Laws of Fla. Pursuant to section 921.1401, Florida Statutes (2016), a trial court may sentence a juvenile to life imprisonment for a non-homicide offense after considering various factors. Pursuant to section 921.1402, a juvenile sentenced to life (or beyond certain thresholds) is entitled to sentence review by the judge after a specified period....

...t. (j) The possibility of rehabilitating the defendant. § 921.1401(2), Fla. Stat. (2016). If sentenced to life for non-homicide offenses, petitioner’s sentence would *268 be subject to review after 20 years and, if necessary, 10 years thereafter. § 921.1402(d)....

...He argues that Treaey has not been abrogated by the change in sentencing law and that, although a life sentence is possible and might ultimately be imposed, this does not mean that he can be held without bond. He argues that, although the legislature enacted sections 921.1401 and 921.1402 to satisfy the requirements of Graham, Treaey remains valid law because he cannot be sentenced to life without a full sentencing hearing....

...pursuant to chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida (which is codified in section 921.1401, Florida Statutes). Indeed, the Court in Kelsey v. State, 206 So. 3d 5, 11 (Fla. 2016), held that in the Graham resentencing context, a defendant’s 45-year sentence without the benefit of review under section 921.1402 was illegal because “the Legislature has determined that the ‘means and mechanisms for compliance’ with Graham are to provide judicial review for juvenile offenders” who are sentenced to lengthy terms of years. This holding was applied to a sentence of 40 years incarceration in Lee v....

...ar mandatory minimum portion of this sentence. We also note that in response to Graham and Miller, effective July 1, 2014, the Florida Legislature enacted legislation providing for mandatory review of a juvenile’s sentence after twenty-five years. § 921.1402(2)(a), (b), Fla....

...considerations and fails to recognize that juveniles have diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform. Young also raises a second argument, not presented to the trial court, that Florida’s juvenile sentencing statutes, codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014), “supersede” the provisions of section 775.087(2), that require the imposition of the ten-year mandatory minimum prison sentence in this case....

...the sentence if the juvenile offender has demonstrated sufficient maturity and reform.” Id. Depending upon the crime committed, the earliest that the Legislature has provided for a judicial review hearing for a juvenile offender serving a lengthy sentence is fifteen years. See § 921.1402(2)(c), Fla....

... Miller appeals the trial court’s September 16, 2015 order denying his 3.850(b)(2) motion for post-conviction relief, arguing he is entitled to resentencing in conformance with chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, which has been codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...1 Miller is thus entitled to judicial review and resentencing.2 1 The State’s contention that Miller was parole-eligible as early as twelve years after the commission of first-degree murder is irrelevant. 2 The State argues that “other than [Miller] being entitled to a sentence review hearing under section 921.1402(2)(a), [Miller] is not entitled to be resentenced under the new juvenile sentencing statutes.” We disagree with this contention. Section 921.1402(1) provides that “[f]or purposes of this section, the term ‘juvenile offender’ means a person sentenced to imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for an offense committed on or after July 1, 2014, and committed before he or she attained 18 years of age.” Both section 921.1402 and section 775.082 are interrelated. Section 921.1402(2)(a) specifically refers and incorporates sentencing under the revised version of section 775.082(1)(b)(1), which provides for judicial review....

...2  We therefore reverse Miller’s first-degree murder sentence and remand to the trial court for the appropriate resentencing under section 775.082(1)(b)(1), Florida Statutes (2016), section 921.1401, Florida Statutes (2014), and section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2015). Reversed and remanded with directions. 3 

...defense witnesses regarding Nelms’ rehabilitation in prison. At the end of the hearing, the court resentenced Nelms to life in prison, with judicial review after twenty-five years, pursuant to chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, as codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes....

...Recently, the Florida Supreme Court held that a juvenile offender’s sentence of life with the possibility of parole after twenty-five years does not violate the Eighth Amendment as described in Graham and Miller, and thus, a juvenile offender who receives such a sentence is not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...at 75 (emphasis added). In response to Graham, our Legislature amended three statutory sections concerning juvenile sentencing, effective on July 1, 2014. See ch. 2014-220, Laws of Fla.1 1 Now codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014). 2 The new juvenile sentencing framework does not prohibit lengthy term-of-years sentences; rather, it establishes a review mechanism whereby the sentencing court can modify the sentence based upon demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation....

...On the same date our supreme court issued Henry, it determined that a juvenile's 70-year sentence likewise violated Graham. Gridine v. State, 175 So. 3d 672, 674-75 (Fla. 2015). Accordingly, the court remanded for resentencing with retroactive application of sections 775.082(3)(c), 921.1401, and 921.1402....

...Importantly, we do not suggest that the trial court cannot sentence Appellant to 45 years' incarceration. Rather, the sentence imposed upon remand must include the requirement that Appellant is entitled to review of his sentence after serving 20 years. See § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

...On remand, the Defendant was resentenced to 55 years’ imprisonment.  The Defendant raises multiple issues on appeal, and we affirm without comment with one ministerial exception. The Defendant argues the circuit court erred by failing to include language in the resentencing order stating that pursuant to section 921.1402(2), Florida Statutes (2017), he was eligible for periodic judicial review of his sentence for capital murder after 25 years....

...written order that Appellant is entitled to sentence review after 25 years.” See, e.g., White v. State, 244 So. 3d 1130, 1130 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (“The State concedes that the trial court should have provided for sentence review after 25 years as required by section 921.1402(2)(b).”). As we did in White, we affirm but remand for the entry of a written order providing that the Defendant is entitled to sentence review after 25 years. The Defendant need not be present for this ministerial sentence cor...

...2016) (applying Miller to discretionary life sentence for second-degree murder). Without an unconstitutional sentence to start with, McCrae is not entitled to resentencing under the new statute. See Abrakata, 168 So. at 252 (“[A]bsent a violation of Graham, there is no legal basis to retroactively apply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing legislation enacted in 2014) to the 2011 offense in this case.”); cf....

...olate Miller.” 192 So. 3d at 469. It concluded, though, that this did not happen in that case. Id. 3 juvenile-sentencing law would have meant McCrae would be eligible for a sentence review after twenty-five years. § 921.1402(2), Fla....

...Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010); Kelsey v. State, 206 So. 3d 5 (Fla. 2016); Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla 2016). Procedurally, the defendant sought relief under the wrong rule because rule 3.802 applies only after a juvenile has been resentenced pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, and the time for a review hearing has arrived. Nevertheless, in light of his 30-year sentence, the defendant was entitled to receive judicial review of his sentence....

...conducting a resentencing hearing. Davis v. State, 230 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to treat the instant motion as a rule 3.800(a) motion and to hold a resentencing hearing pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. REVERSED and REMANDED. EVANDER, J....

...48, 75 (2010)). At the resentencing hearing on remand, the trial judge heard testimony and resentenced appellant to an aggregate sentence of 70 years. The trial judge recognized that appellant would be entitled to a meaningful review of his sentence under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2016). Neither the judgment nor the sentence documentation indicate that appellant is entitled to sentence review. Written findings are required by statute. See § 775.082(3)(b)2.c., Fla. Stat. (2016) (providing that “[t]he court shall make a written finding as to whether a person is eligible for a sentence review hearing under s. 921.1402(b) or (c).”) (emphasis added).  We reject appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on this direct appeal from the resentencing....

mandatory for a trial court to conduct the review. § 921.1402(6).")

...followed by ten years of probation, with credit for 1,933 days. Appellant filed a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) with the sentencing court, arguing that he should have been sentenced based on the guidelines in Graham and section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2014). The trial court denied the motion because appellant’s offense predated the July 1, 2014 offense date stated in section 921.1402, and because appellant’s sentence was not a de facto life sentence subject to the requirements of Graham. On appeal, appellant argues that the 35-year prison sentence, followed by ten years of probation, does not afford a meani...

...that Graham “does indeed apply to term-of-years sentences” and that such sentences need not be “de facto life” sentences. Id. at 1240 (quoting Kelsey, 206 So. 3d at 10). Here, the trial court denied appellant’s postconviction motion to be sentenced under section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes, because his offense predated July 1, 2014 and because appellant’s 35-year sentence was not a de facto life sentence....

...rehabilitation, as detailed in Johnson II. Accordingly, we reverse appellant’s sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with the sentencing procedures set forth in chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, as codified in sections 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes. 6  Affirmed in part, Reversed in part and Remanded. CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed moti...

...He was initially sentenced in 2012 to life imprisonment without parole. This judgment and sentence were appealed to this court. We initially relinquished jurisdiction to the trial court for Appellant’s resentencing as a juvenile offender under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014)....

...4th DCA 2009) (“There is no prohibition to the filing of successive rule 3.800(a) motions so long as the merits of the issue presented have not previously been addressed, and no time limit on the filing of rule 3.800(a) motions exists.”). Pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2014), Appellant was entitled to a resentencing hearing—including consideration of various factors to determine an appropriate sentence—as well as a written finding of his entitlement to juvenile offender...

...finding requiring a juvenile offender review hearing after 25 years, instead erroneously noting eligibility for “parole.” Parole had been abolished in Florida at the time of Appellant’s initial sentencing. When a defendant is resentenced under section 921.1402, section 775.082 requires a written finding that the defendant is entitled to juvenile offender sentence review....

...Appellant challenges the trial court’s order issued following his sentence review hearing that denied his request for sentence modification after concluding that Appellant was not rehabilitated such that he was “fit to reenter society.” See § 921.1402(7), Fla. Stat....

...the time of his trial, such a sentence would have later been held unconstitutional. See Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 574 (2005), abrogating Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989). 2 offenders are not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes.” Id....

...3d 712, 716–17 (Fla. 2022) (explaining when postconviction proceedings result in final, appealable orders). It then conducted resentencing in December 2021. At the resentencing, Appellant, under the belief that he would not be entitled to sentence review under section 921.1402 if parole eligible, asked to be sentenced to life without parole....

...But the court in Morgan did not discuss the numerous cases that have held a defendant cannot agree to an illegal sentence. But for Appellant’s request to be resentenced under section 921.1401 because he believed it was the only way to allow for a sentence review hearing under 921.1402, his life without parole sentence would clearly be an illegal sentence....

...However, we agree with Wirth that he was sentenced to life for the robbery count without his sentence providing for a méan-ingful opportunity to obtain release in contravention of Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 75 , 130 S.Ct. 2011 , 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), and section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2016)....

those statutes. Ch. 2014-220 (title); see also § 921.1402, Fla. Stat. (2015) (“Review of sentences for

...Matias's sentencing documents that he was entitled to judicial review of his sentences after twenty years.2 Section 775.082(3)(c), Florida Statutes (2017), provides that "[a] person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 20 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(d)" if the offense was committed before the defendant was eighteen years old....

...t correctly found that Mr. Matias will be entitled to review of his sentences because the sentences exceed twenty years in prison: "The Court further finds that [t]he Defendant is entitled to judicial review of his sentence pursuant to Fla. Stat. 921.1402." Nonetheless, the trial court found that it was not required to delineate the right to such review in a written order, noting that section 921.1402(3), Florida Statutes (2015), "states that the Department of Corrections shall notify the juvenile offender of his or her eligibility to request a sentence review hearing 18 months before the juvenile offender is entitled to a sentence review hearing....

...a sentence, as subsection (4) provides that the offender initiates the sentence review by submitting an application to the trial court requesting that a sentence review hearing be held. After receiving this application, it is mandatory for a trial court to conduct the review. § 921.1402(6). However, as noted by Mr. Matias, the problem in the present case is that section 921.1402(1) specifically provides that it applies only to offenses that were committed after July 1, 2014, and Mr. Matias's offenses were committed in 2002 and 2003. Therefore, based on a strict reading of section 921.1402, Mr....

...Matias's sentences comply with the dictates of section 775.082(3)(c) and Kelsey, we remand with directions to the trial court to amend the -3- sentencing documents to provide that Mr. Matias is entitled to a judicial review hearing pursuant to section 921.1402 after Mr....

...differences counsel against irrevocably sentencing them to a lifetime in prison.” 567 U.S. at 480. In response to Graham and Miller, the Florida Legislature adopted chapter 2014–220, Laws of Florida, which is primarily codified in sections 921.1401 and 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes....

...g a potential life sentence does not violate Graham or Miller so long as the juvenile was afforded an individualized sentencing hearing pursuant to section 921.1401 and is later afforded periodic judicial review of his or her sentence as provided in section 921.1402....

...2d DCA 2016). Although Morris committed his crimes in 2012, before the enactment of chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, he was sentenced in 2014, after the statute was enacted. However, by its own terms, chapter 2014-220 does not apply to Morris. *245 § 921.1402(1) Fla....

...ttempted robbery with a deadly weapon, sexual battery, and attempted battery without comment. However, in light of recent decisions of the Florida Supreme Court addressing juvenile life and lengthy term-of-years sentences and the applicability of section 921.1402, -2- Florida Statutes (2014), we reverse Morris's sixty-five-year sentences for the armed burglary conviction in case 2008-CF-9210 and for the kidnapping and two sexual battery conv...

...with the holdings of Henry and Horsley v. State, 160 So. 3d 393 (Fla. 2015), which determined that chapter 2014-220 is applicable to all juvenile offenders whose sentences are unconstitutional under Miller and Graham. See §§ 775.082, 921.1401, 921.1402, Fla....

...We reverse Neely’s non-homicide and first-degree murder sentences and remand for resentencing because a life sentence for juvenile offenders is impermissible without a meaningful opportunity for release as provided for in section 775.082(1)(b)(1), Florida Statutes (2014), and section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2015)....

...at 736. The Florida Supreme Court held in Falcon v. State, 162 So. 3d 954 (Fla. 2015), that Miller applied retroactively, and the appropriate remedy for a Miller violation was resentencing the juvenile offender pursuant to sections 775.082, 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...idualized consideration and an opportunity for release”). Accordingly, we reverse Neely’s non-homicide and first-degree murder sentences and remand to the trial court for the appropriate resentencing under sections 775.082(1)(b)(1) and 921.1402, and consistent with the cases cited herein. Reversed and remanded with directions. 4 

providing Gabriel with a review hearing under section 921.1402 after he serves twenty-five years of his

...intended to kill a victim.” (citing Falcon v. State, 162 So. 3d 954, 963 (Fla. 2015))). Lastly, we note that the trial court provided in Leppert’s sentence that she was eligible for a judicial review hearing after twenty-five years for all three charges. Pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2016), Leppert was entitled to a review of her robbery and burglary convictions after twenty years. § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

review as required for juvenile offenders by section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2016); and (2) the trial

...to address the prohibition set forth in Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), of a mandatory life sentence for any crime committed by a juvenile. The trial court also ordered a “sentence review hearing” to occur after 25 years, pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, due to the fact Appellant was convicted of a “capital felony,” referencing the homicide offense....

...3d 452, 453 (Fla. 2015). The Court in Lawton went on to state, “the ban on sentencing juveniles to life without parole for nonhomicide offenses is, indeed, unqualified.” Id. However, a life sentence with future judicial review, as provided by section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014), validly addresses the constitutional requirements for cases such as Appellant’s....

...sentences for counts I and III are AFFIRMED. However, Appellant’s life sentence for count II, armed robbery with a firearm, committed when he was seventeen, is REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing, including the judicial review provided for by section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, as applicable. WETHERELL and JAY, JJ., CONCUR. 4 

...Because the defendant is eligible for parole, his sentence is not unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), or Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010). See Franklin v. State, 43 Fla. L. Weekly S556 (Fla. Nov. 8, 2018). He is not therefore entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. In State v....

...Second, the trial court incorrectly applied the theory of statutory revival when considering possible sentences for Appellant. As discussed above, Florida has adopted a new sentencing scheme for juvenile defendants who commit capital felonies. Codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014), this new legislation provides, in part, that a juvenile defendant who commits a capital felony shall be punished by either a life sentence or by a term of at least forty years....

...In determining if a life sentence is appropriate, the trial court should conduct a hearing, considering “factors relevant to the offense and the defendant’s youth and attendant circumstances,” including the factors enumerated in section 2 921.1401(2)(a)-(j). § 921.1401(2). Under section 921.1402(2)(a), “[a] juvenile offender sentenced under s....

...denying in part his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. The court granted Maxwell, a juvenile nonhomicide offender, a judicial review hearing of his lengthy prison sentence under sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2017), but denied his separate request for a resentencing hearing.  Based upon our recent precedent, we agree with Maxwell that he is entitled to a resentencing hearing pursuant to section 921.1402....

...On remand, Lacue was resentenced to life imprisonment. Lacue raises five issues on appeal, and we affirm without comment with one exception. Lacue argues—and the state concedes—that the trial court should have included language in the resentencing order providing for sentence review after 25 years as required by section 921.1402(2)(a). We accept the concession and remand for the trial court to provide for sentence review. See § 775.082(1)(b)3., Fla. Stat. (2017) (“The court shall make a written finding as to whether a person is eligible for a sentence review hearing under s. 921.1402(2)(a) or (c).”); Cook v....

...itutional actors like the Public Defender—to remain mindful of the formal requirements governing withdrawal. OPINION Mr. Burton appeals from the postconviction court's decision not to modify his sentence under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2023), following his 1995 convictions for first-degree murder and armed robbery....

agree with the state’s concession of error. See § 921.1402(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2022) (“A juvenile offender

...-2- the parties have agreed that life imprisonment, or a term of years equal to life imprisonment, will not be sought. Next, we divide subdivision (c) (Findings) into new subdivisions (c)(1)-(c)(3). Subdivision (c)(1) adds a reference to section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes....

...In regard to the sentence pertaining to capital cases, the sentence is deleted and rewritten as (c)(2) so that it is not so broad, to make clear that a defendant who is convicted of premeditated murder is not entitled to a sentencing review proceeding if the defendant was previously convicted of an offense enumerated in section 921.1402(2)(a)....

...relevant factors have been reviewed and considered by the court prior to imposing a sentence of life imprisonment or a term of years equal to life imprisonment. The court shall make written findings as to whether the defendant is eligible for a sentence review hearing under sections 921.1402(2)(a), (2)(b), or (2)(c), Florida Statutes, based on whether the defendant killed, attempted to kill, or intended to kill the victim. In capital cases, the court’s determination of whether the defendant is eligible for a sentence review hearing is based further on whether the defendant has a previous conviction for one of the enumerated offenses or conspiracy to commit one of the enumerated offenses found in section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes. (2) A defendant who is convicted of an offense punishable under section 775.082(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes, shall not be eligible for a sentence review hearing if the trial court finds that the defendant has previously been convicted of one of the enumerated offenses, or conspiracy to commit one of the enumerated offenses, found in section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes. (3) A copy of the written findings shall be made a part of the commitment packet for the Department of Corrections. -6- RULE 3.802....

...(5) if the application is being filed by a juvenile offender sentenced to life pursuant to section 775.082(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes, a statement certifying that the applicant has not been previously convicted of one of the offenses enumerated in sections 921.1402(2)(a)1.–(2)(a)10., Florida Statutes, or conspiracy to commit one of offenses enumerated in sections 921.1402(2)(a)1.–(2)(a)10., Florida Statutes, in a separate criminal transaction or episode than that which resulted in the sentence under section 775.082(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes. (d) Procedure; Evidentiary Hearing; Disposition....

...sentence should be modified. The juvenile offender is entitled to be represented by counsel at the review hearing. If the application, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the applicant does not qualify as a juvenile offender under section 921.1402(1), Florida Statutes, or that the application is premature, the court may deny the application -7- without a hearing, and shall attach such documents to the order....

...o reenter society, the court shall issue a written order stating the reasons why the sentence is not being modified. (e) – (f) [No change] (g) Right to Counsel. A juvenile offender who is eligible for a sentence review hearing under section 921.1402(5), Florida Statutes, is entitled to be represented by counsel, and the court shall appoint a public defender to represent the juvenile offender if the juvenile offender cannot afford an attorney. RULE 9.141....

...extensive criminal history, the escalating nature of his criminal conduct, and his high risk of reoffending. Before pronouncing sentence, the trial court asked the parties whether Parrish’s sentence should be subject to judicial review after twenty years, pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes....

...Parrish argued in his motion that because he was under eighteen years old when he committed sexual battery, because sexual battery is a life felony, and because he was sentenced to more than twenty years imprisonment, that he is eligible for judicial review after twenty years under section 921.1402(2)(d)....

...convicted of a life felony. See § 958.04(1)(c), Fla. Stat. 2  II Regarding the motion to correct sentencing error, it appears to us that Parrish does meet the requirements of section 921.1402(2)(d), which entitles him to a review of his sentence after twenty years. However, we see no requirement that the court, when sentencing an offender, is required to pronounce the offender’s entitlement to a sentence review pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d). Nor is the sentencing court required to indicate these facts on the sentencing order. 2,3 Rather, section 921.1402(3) places the requirement to notify Parrish of his eligibility for a sentence review on the Department of Corrections: “The Department of Corrections shall notify a juvenile offender of his or her eligibility to request a sentence review hearing 18 months before the juvenile offender is entitled to a sentence review hearing under this section.” And section 921.1402(4) places the burden of seeking judicial review on the offender once notified: “A juvenile offender seeking sentence review pursuant to subsection (2) must submit an application to the court of original jurisdiction requesting that a sentence review hearing be held.” The sentencing court’s responsibility, on the other hand, is set forth in section 921.1402(6) and is triggered upon receiving an application for judicial review: “Upon receiving an 2 This would not be the case for an offender convicted of murder, under section 782.04, Florida Statutes, committed before the age of eighteen....

...For such offenders, the court is required to make written findings indicating whether the offender actually killed, intended to kill, or attempted to kill the victim. This finding determines the length of time before the offender is eligible for a sentence review. See §§ 775.082(1)(b)3., (3)(a)5.c., (3)(b)2.c.; 921.1402(2)(a)–(c), Fla. Stat. No such finding is required for offenders convicted of any crime other than murder. See §§ 775.082(3)(c), 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

...application from an eligible juvenile offender, the court of original sentencing jurisdiction shall hold a sentence review hearing to determine whether the juvenile offender’s sentence should be modified.” Because the trial court had no affirmative duty under section 921.1402 to notify Parrish at sentencing of his eligibility for judicial review, Parrish has not established a sentencing error that the court was required to correct. III Regarding Parrish’s claim tha...

...App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________ BILBREY, J., concurring. I concur in the majority decision. I agree that Appellant is entitled to a sentence review after twenty years. See §§ 775.082(3)(c), 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

...to pronounce eligibility at sentencing and include such eligibility in the commitment documents provided to the Department of Corrections. The Department must notify juvenile offenders of their eligibility for a sentence review eighteen months before entitlement. § 921.1402(3), Fla....

...in writing. Additionally, juvenile offenders may be more likely to undertake rehabilitation, express remorse, and complete education and training programs while in prison if they know of the possibility of a reduced sentence in the future. See § 921.1402(6)(a), (6)(e), (6)(g) (listing certain factors to be considered during a sentence review hearing)....

...But the rule did not require written findings of sentence review eligibility for Appellant. The second sentence of rule 3.781(c)(1) states, “The court shall make written findings as to whether the juvenile offender is eligible for a sentence review hearing under sections 921.1402(2)(a), 2(b), or 2(c), Florida Statutes, based on whether the defendant killed, attempted to kill, or intended to kill the victim.” Those three subsections of section 921.1402 cross reference subsections of section 775.082 which concern only juvenile offenders who commit murder or felony murder of varying degrees. Section 921.1402(2)(d), not mentioned in the rule, cross references section 782.082(3)(c) which applies to a juvenile offender like Appellant who commits a nonhomicide life felony or first degree felony punishable by life....

...State, 181 So. 3d 452, 453 (Fla. 2015), and he was resentenced to two life terms and two forty-year terms under section 775.082(1)(b)(1), Florida Statutes (2016), with the proviso that he could petition the court for review after twenty-five years under section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2016)....

application of the sentence review procedures under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. Based on our precedent

...48 (2010).” Consistent with section 921.1401, and modified from the CPRC’s proposal, rule 3.781 applies to crimes committed under the specified statutes “on or after July 1, 2014.” The Court adopts new rule 3.802 (Review of Sentences for Juvenile Offenders), which derives from the enactment of section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. Chapter 2014-220, section 3, Laws of Florida, effective July 1, 2014, created new section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, which provides for the review of sentences for persons convicted of specified offenses committed while under the age of 18 years....

...relevant factors have been reviewed and considered by the court prior to imposing a sentence of life imprisonment or a term of years equal to life imprisonment. The court shall make written findings as to whether the defendant is eligible for a sentence review hearing under sections 921.1402(2)(b) or (2)(c), Florida Statutes, based on whether the defendant killed, attempted to kill, or intended to kill the victim. In capital cases, the court’s determination of whether the defendant is eligible for a sentence review hearing is based further on whether the defendant has a previous conviction for one of the enumerated offenses or conspiracy to commit one of the enumerated offenses found in section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes. -7-  A copy of the written findings shall be made a part of the commitment packet for the Department of Corrections. RULE 3.802. REVIEW OF SENTENCES FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS (a) Application. A juvenile offender, as defined in section 921.1402(1), Florida Statutes, may seek a modification of sentence pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, by submitting an application to the trial court requesting a sentence review hearing. (b) Time for Filing. An application for sentence review may not be filed until the juvenile offender becomes eligible pursuant to section 921.1402(2), Florida Statutes....

... (5) if the application is being filed by a juvenile offender sentenced to life pursuant to section 775.082(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes, a statement certifying that the applicant has not been previously convicted of one of the offenses enumerated in section 921.1402(2)(a)1.–(2)(a)10., Florida Statutes, or conspiracy to commit one of offenses enumerated in section 921.1402(2)(a)1.–(2)(a)10., Florida Statutes, in a separate criminal transaction or episode than that which resulted in the sentence under section 775.082(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes. (d) Procedure; Evidentiary Hearing; Disposition....

...sentence should be modified. The juvenile offender is entitled to be represented by counsel at the review hearing. If the application, files, and records in the case conclusively show that the applicant does not qualify as a juvenile offender under section 921.1402(1), Florida Statutes, or that the application is premature, the court may deny the application without a hearing....

...(e) Successive Applications. A second or successive application shall be denied without a hearing, except under the following circumstances: (1) the initial application was denied as premature; or (2) pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes, the initial application was submitted by a juvenile offender sentenced to a term of 20 years or more under section 775.082(3)(c), Florida Statutes, and more than 10 years has elapsed since the initial sentence review hearing. (f) Jurisdiction....

...ace.  As to Counts 1, 2, 3 and 5, the sentencing documents shall, on remand, be amended to reflect that Henry is entitled to a review of his sentence after serving twenty years, not twenty years after the date of his initial sentencing. See § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla. Stat....

...dure 3.800(b)(2), seeking to be resentenced under the new law. The trial court denied Ejak's request for a new sentencing hearing, but it granted the motion in part and amended Ejak's sentence to provide for subsequent judicial review pursuant to section 921.1402(2), Florida Statutes (2014)....

...Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mark J. Hamel, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee. GERBER, C.J. The defendant appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion for review of sentence pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2016). The defendant argues that neither the trial court’s oral pronouncement denying the motion, nor the trial court’s written order denying the motion, indicates that the court considered the factors outlined under section 921.1402....

...attention after the trial court’s oral pronouncement and written order. The state also argues that, if the defendant is left to pursue a fundamental error argument, then no fundamental error exists because the record indicates that the court considered the section 921.1402 factors in denying the motion.  We agree with the state’s two arguments....

...In the written order, the trial court recited section 921.1401 as quoted above, and then expressly addressed each factor one- by-one as applied to the evidence presented. 2  Two years later, the defendant filed a “Motion for Review of Sentence Pursuant to Section 921.1402, Florida Statutes.” Section 921.1402 states, in pertinent part: (6) Upon receiving an application from an eligible juvenile offender, the court of original sentencing jurisdiction shall hold a sentence review hearing to determine whether the juvenile offender’s sentence should be modified....

...(i) The results of any mental health assessment, risk assessment, or evaluation of the juvenile offender as to rehabilitation. 3  Upon receiving the motion, the trial court, consistent with section 921.1402, set a sentence review hearing. At the hearing, the defendant presented evidence relevant to nearly all of the section 921.1402 factors. During closing argument, defense counsel stated: A lot of these [921.1402] factors [were] already considered in the re-sentencing and the Court has already found these factors and considered them....

...what he has done to rehabilitate, and has to make a determination if, in fact, he has been rehabilitated. The trial court orally pronounced it was denying the motion for review. The court’s oral pronouncement did not expressly mention section 921.1402 or its factors by number or name....

...I don’t want you to misconstrue the fact that I don’t address and recognize the positive steps that you’ve taken. But I just do not believe a modification is appropriate right now. The court then entered a written order denying the motion for review. See § 921.1402(7), Fla....

...(2015) (“If the court determines that the juvenile offender has not demonstrated rehabilitation or is not fit to reenter society, the court shall issue a written order stating the reasons why the sentence is not being modified.”) (emphasis added). Although the court’s written order did not expressly mention section 921.1402 or its factors by number or name, the court entitled its order as an “Order on Motion for Review of Sentence.” The court’s order then stated, in pertinent part: Defendant [] had a resentencing hearing in 2016 pursuant to Florida Statutes 921.1401....

...Therefore, modification of the Defendant’s sentence is not appropriate at this time. After the trial court’s oral pronouncement, the defendant did not object or seek to clarify whether the court based its denial on its consideration of the section 921.1402 factors, or merely relied on its earlier evaluation of the section 921.1401 factors. Similarly, after the court entered its written order, the defendant did not file a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(1) or 3.850(a)(1) motion seeking to clarify whether the trial court based its denial on its consideration of the section 921.1402 factors, or merely relied on its earlier evaluation of the section 921.1401 factors. Instead, the defendant filed this appeal. The defendant argues that neither the trial court’s oral pronouncement nor the trial court’s written order indicates that the court considered the section 921.1402 factors. Instead, the defendant argues, the trial court’s written order, incorporating the earlier 921.1401 resentencing order, appears to indicate that the court merely relied on its earlier evaluation of the section 921.1401 fact...

...attention after the trial court’s oral pronouncement and written order. The state also argues that, if the defendant is left to pursue a fundamental error argument, then no fundamental error exists because the record indicates that the court considered the section 921.1402 factors in denying the motion. Our Review We agree with the state’s two arguments....

...We address each in turn. 5  First, the defendant’s argument was not preserved. After the trial court’s oral pronouncement, the defendant did not object or seek to clarify whether the trial court based its denial on its consideration of the section 921.1402 factors, or merely relied on its earlier evaluation of the section 921.1401 factors. Similarly, after the court entered its written order, the defendant did not file a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion seeking to clarify whether the trial court based its denial on its consideration of the section 921.1402 factors, or merely relied on its earlier evaluation of the section 921.1401 factors....

...2009) (fundamental error is “an error that goes to the foundation of the case . . . and is equivalent to a denial of due process”) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Nothing in the record suggests that the trial court was confused or that the court did not consider the section 921.1402 factors. On the contrary, the court’s oral pronouncement alluded to some of the section 921.1402 factors: [Y]ou’ve done all of these classes and you obviously are trying to better yourself ....

...I don’t want you to misconstrue the fact that I don’t address and recognize the positive steps that you’ve taken. But I just do not believe a modification is appropriate right now. Similarly, the court’s written order also alluded to some of the section 921.1402 factors: While it is apparent that the Defendant has made positive strides while in prison ....

...ror at all. Conclusion With the benefit of appellate hindsight, we can say that this appeal may have been avoided if the trial court’s written order denying the defendant’s motion for review would have recited section 921.1402 as quoted above, and then expressly addressed each factor one-by-one as applied to the evidence presented. However, we also recognize that section 921.1402(7)’s plain language (“[T]he court shall issue a written order stating the reasons why the sentence is not being modified.”) does not require such detail. Nevertheless, trial courts may wish to consider addressing each 921.1402 factor as a better practice to ensure the appearance of compliance with the Legislature’s directives. Affirmed. LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of...

...On all arguments raised, we affirm the sentences without further discussion. However, we remand for three purposes. First, we remand for entry of a written order providing for judicial review of the defendant’s sentence after twenty years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2018) (“A juvenile offender sentenced to a term of 20 years or more under s....

...Ejak filed a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error citing Horsley and arguing that he was entitled to a new sentencing hearing in accordance with the procedures outlined in chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, which are codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014). The trial court granted the motion in part. As required by section 775.082(1)(b)(3), it made a written finding that Ejak was eligible for a sentence review hearing under section 921.1402(2)(a)....

...ubsequent judicial review of their -3- sentences, the trial court recognized this and, as required by section 775.082(1)(b)(3), made a written finding that Ejak was eligible for sentence review under section 921.1402(2)....

...his forty-five year prison term is a de facto life sentence in violation of Graham, which it is not under our Court’s precedents. See Abrakata v. State, 168 So. 3d 251, 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (“absent a violation of Graham, there is no legal basis to retroactively apply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing legislation enacted in 2014) to the 2011 offense in this case.”); Lambert v....

...2455 (2012) to concurrent thirty- and forty-year sentences. This Court upheld those resentences, but the supreme court “remanded for resentencing in conformity with the framework established in chapter 2014– 220, Laws of Florida, which has been codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes....

...remedy of retroactive application of a new sentencing law, despite that law’s terms limiting its application to offenses “committed on or after July 1, 2014.” Ch. 2014-220, §§ 2, 3, at 2872-73, Laws of Fla. (codified at §§ 921.1401(1); 921.1402(1), Fla....

...first-degree felony), and sentenced to twenty-five years in prison with a twenty- five-year mandatory minimum. 168 So. 3d at 251, 251 n.1. On appeal to this court, 10  The appellant now seeks either resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014), or judicial abolition of parole ineligibility....

...re offenders to serve 85 percent of their sentences, or the provision in the new sentence review law for juveniles making review available only for offenses committed on or after July 1, 2014.” Under Henry, he is entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, enacted last year, ch. 2014-220, Laws of Fla., § 3, but not to the invalidation of the statutory provisions he seeks in the Abrakata argued he was entitled “to a review of his sentence after 15 years under section 921.1402(2)(c), Florida Statutes.” Id. at 251. This court rejected Abrakata’s argument, reasoning, “absent a violation of Graham, there is no legal basis to retroactively apply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing legislation enacted in 2014) to the 2011 offense in this case.” Id....

...1st DCA 2015). But it is now clear that so-called Graham cases are to be treated just like cases revisited under Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012), and that an initial resentencing that, even though not a life sentence (or the equivalent) itself, does not conform to the requirements of Henry and section 921.1402 must be set aside and reimposed “in light of the new juvenile sentencing legislation.” Henry, 40 Fla. L....

...ole, albeit after individualized consideration. Horsley, 160 So. 3d at 396–97. On direct review of his resentencing, our supreme court concluded that chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, (now codified as sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes) should be applied to Horsley (and “all juvenile offenders whose sentences are unconstitutional under Miller”) even though Horsley’s offense was committed prior to the effective date of the new juvenile sentencing legislation....

...Just as in the present case, Henry’s original sentence did not comply with the dictates of Graham. Just as the supreme court ordered Henry to be resentenced under chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, id., an intervening resentencing notwithstanding, we should order resentencing in the present case under section 921.1402(2)(d) (as the same provision is now codified)....

...e concurrent forty-five-year sentences Kelsey received for nonhomicide offenses on resentencing are not the life sentences that Graham condemned. 6 Even so, appellant is entitled to a review of his concurrent forty-five-year sentences pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statues, which provides: A juvenile offender sentenced to a term of 20 years or more under s....

...isonment of more than twenty years for a nonhomicide offense are entitled to a subsequent judicial review of their sentences. Ch. 2014-220, §§ 1, 3, Laws of Fla. [codified at sections 775.082 and 921.1402, Fla....

...subsequent review hearing 10 years after the initial review hearing,” if the juvenile nonhomicide offender is not resentenced at the initial review hearing. Ch. 2014- 220, § 3, Laws of Fla. [codified at section 921.1402, Fla. Stat.] This is the only class of juvenile offenders entitled to more than one subsequent sentence review. 160 So....

...3d at 404–05. Under Henry, Kelsey is entitled to a review of his concurrent forty-five-year sentences after twenty years of incarceration (and to a second review hearing in another ten years should he not be resentenced at the initial hearing). See § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

...If the court finds that life imprisonment is not an appropriate sentence, such person shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of at least 40 years. A person sentenced pursuant to this subparagraph is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(a). 2....

...conducted by the court in accordance with s. 921.1401, the court finds that life imprisonment is an appropriate sentence. A person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 15 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(c). Ch. 2014–220, § 1, Laws of Fla. Alongside these changes, the Legislature also created section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, which provides, in pertinent part: (2)(a) A juvenile offender sentenced under s. 775.082(1)(b)1....

...in its place. As to Counts 1, 2, 3 and 5, the sentencing documents shall, on remand, be amended to reflect that Henry is entitled to a review of his- sentence after serving twenty years, not twenty years after the date of his initial sentencing. See § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla....

...If the court finds that life imprisonment is not an appropriate sentence, such person shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of at least 40 years. A person sentenced pursuant to this subparagraph is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(a). (b)2....

...921.1401, the court finds that life imprisonment is 4  an appropriate sentence. A person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 15 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(c). (emphasis added). Based on these amendments, the Florida Legislature enacted section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2017), and specifically subsection (2) which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (a) A juvenile offender sentenced under s....

...General, for appellee. Before EMAS, LINDSEY and GORDO, JJ. PER CURIAM.  Affirmed. See Hernandez v. State, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D1079, D1080 (Fla. 3d DCA May 16, 2018) (“The trial court’s findings of fact on the statutory factors listed in [section 921.1402] are reviewed for the existence of competent, substantial evidence in the record.”); Bell v....

2015), he was entitled to be sentenced under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2014),1 even though his

...sonment with 4,235 days jail credit or time served to “run consecutive with the sentence imposed in count[s] [I–XI].” • Judicial review after twenty years of the sentence has been served, “pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), [Florida Statutes].” (“2019 sentence”). The defendant moved under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) to correct the new sentence, arguing the trial court “violated double jeopardy by resente...

...Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.  Ronnie Bruce appeals the trial court’s denial of his Application for Review of Sentences for Juvenile Offenders, pursuant to § 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2021), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.802....

...United States Constitution as delineated by the United States Supreme Court in Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), and Virginia v. LeBlanc, 137 S. Ct. 1726 (2017). Therefore, such juvenile offenders are not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. BACKGROUND Budry Michel was charged with first-degree murder, armed robbery, armed kidnapping, and attempted armed robbery in the shooting death of Lynette Grames and robbery of Adnan Shafi Dada....

...parole after 25 years under Florida’s parole system do not violate “Graham’s requirement that juveniles . . . have a meaningful opportunity to receive parole.” LeBlanc, 137 S. Ct. at 1729. Therefore, such juvenile offenders are not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...discretion to impose a term of years sentence as low as forty years’ imprisonment. See § 775.082(1)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2017). Moreover, and importantly, Atwell would be entitled to review of his sentence after twenty-five years’ imprisonment. See § 921.1402(2)(a), Fla....

...Atwell’s sentence review hearing would be presided over by a trial judge, and would include his presence with an attorney, and the ability to present pertinent information to prove his entitlement to release based on maturity and rehabilitation. Id. § 921.1402 (5)-(6). Michel, by contrast, will remain sentenced to life in prison, being entitled to review of his sentence after twenty-five years, at a hearing presided over by the parole commission....

...2014) (observing that this Court has, “prior to any directly applicable 5. I would strongly urge the Legislature to look at the implications of the plurality’s decision to determine whether amendments are warranted to chapter 2014-220, sections 2-3, Laws of Florida. See §§ 921.1401, 921.1402, Fla....

...[and] [i]n this jurisdiction, sentencing is a joint exercise by the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.” James, 59 A.3d at 1238. Following Miller, the Florida Legislature created a new and separate system of judicial review, specific to juveniles. See § 921.1402, Fla....

...eview of their - 26 - sentences at twenty-five years. See § 775.082(1)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2017). This judicial review includes a hearing, where the juvenile is “entitled to be represented by counsel.” § 921.1402(5), Fla. Stat. (2017). Additionally, a trial court will determine whether the juvenile is entitled to resentencing or early release. Id. § 921.1402(6)....

...physical, or emotional abuse before he or she committed the offense. - 27 -  (i) The results of any mental health assessment, risk assessment, or evaluation of the juvenile offender as to rehabilitation. Id. § 921.1402(6)....

...If the court finds that life imprisonment is not an appropriate sentence, such person shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of at least 40 years. A person sentenced pursuant to this subparagraph is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(a). 2....

...with s. 921.1401, the court finds that life imprisonment is an appropriate sentence. A person who is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 15 years is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(c). § 775.082(1)(b)1.-2., Fla. Stat. (2017) (emphasis added). Section 921.1402(2), Florida Statutes (2017), provides in pertinent part: (a) A juvenile offender sentenced under s....

...part of a separate criminal transaction or episode]. ... (c) A juvenile offender sentenced to a term of more than 15 years under s. 775.082(1)(b)2. . . . is entitled to a review of his or her sentence after 15 years. § 921.1402(2)(a), (c), Fla....

...otherwise notifying the parties. On the 2018 order’s first page, the trial court handwrote: “Corrected as to min/man.” On the second page, the trial court checked the box next to “other mandatory minimum” and handwrote: “40 yrs CT I and II pursuant to F.S. 921.1402(2)(a).” At the bottom of that page, next to the trial court’s signature, the trial court handwrote: “nunc pro tunc” to the 2017 resentencing order....

...Nobles, Judge. May 28, 2025 OSTERHAUS, C.J. James Patrick Bonifay appeals his resentencing on the homicide and other crimes that he committed as a juvenile. He argues that the consecutive sentences imposed by the trial court under §§ 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes, constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the United States Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence....

...In turn, the Florida Supreme Court effectively declared Florida’s prior life sentencing scheme unconstitutional as to juvenile offenders. See Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2016), abrogated by Franklin v. State, 258 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2018). And the Florida Legislature enacted §§ 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes, to provide juvenile offenders with individualized sentencing consideration consistent with Miller....

...entence without parole on a juvenile homicide offender so long as the defendant’s youth was considered at sentencing. Id. at 479–80. In response to Graham and Miller, the Florida Legislature amended Florida law by passing §§ 921.1401 and 921.1402....

...reviewed de novo. Marshall v. State, 277 So. 3d 1149, 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). Appellant argues that his consecutive sentences violate constitutional limitations on juvenile sentencing set forth in Miller and Graham by rendering illusory the § 921.1402 review of his murder sentence....

...t-degree murder and to a consecutive term of thirty years for attempted first-degree murder.” Hernandez I, 117 So. 3d at 779. 1 Chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, amending section 775.082, Florida Statutes, and adding new sections 921.1401 and 921.1402, Florida Statutes. 2  In his appeal from the convictions and sentences, Hernandez challenged his sentence for the first-degree murder as violative of the United States and Florida Constitutio...

...Hernandez I and need not be repeated here. The amended sentencing order again sentenced Hernandez to life in state prison without parole on the murder count, but included a right to a review of his sentence after 25 years, as provided by sections 921.1402(2)(a) and 775.082(1)(b)1....

...him through age 69 even if released from the Count I sentence after the 25-year review. We agree with Hernandez that this violates Graham and Henry, but only insofar as it omits a separate 25-year right of review on the Count II sentence. Section 921.1402(2)(b) of the juvenile sentencing law provides that “[a] juvenile offender sentenced to a term of more than 25 years under s....

...2015). 12 includes a sentence imposed upon a person who “attempted to kill the victim and is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than 25 years,” granting the entitlement to a review after 25 years under section 921.1402(2)(b). Hernandez is thus entitled to a review on the Count II sentence after serving 25 years on that count, though this may not be meaningful if he is not released from further imprisonment on his Count I life sentence upon the 25-year review on that sentence....

...resentencing under the juvenile sentencing statute); Stephenson v. State, 197 So. 3d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (consecutive sentences aggregating 90 years for crimes committed as a juvenile; remanded for resentencing per Henry and section 13 921.1402); Burrows v....

...On this issue, we find a single meritorious point. We reverse and remand for the ministerial step of amending the sentence for attempted murder, Count II, to provide for a review after 25 years of time served on that sentence, to fulfill the requirement in section 921.1402(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2014), operative only at such time (if any) as Hernandez is released from further imprisonment on his Count I sentence and his consecutive Count II sentence actually commences.8 Hernandez need not be prese...

Defendant’s sentence after twenty years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2019) (“A juvenile

...possibility of parole for all juveniles convicted of homicide likewise violates the Eighth Amendment. In response to Graham and Miller, the Florida Legislature adopted chapter 2014-220, Laws of Florida, codified in sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, Florida Statutes....

...ch describes eleven factors a court must consider before sentencing a juvenile to life. A juvenile sentenced to life in prison under the 2014 version of section 775.082(1)(b)1 is entitled to review of his sentence after twenty-five years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(a). Roughly two years after the legislature enacted the new juvenile sentencing framework, the Florida Supreme Court in Atwell v....

...e system" complied with Graham's requirement that juvenile offenders be afforded a "meaningful opportunity" for release and that those juvenile 4 offenders therefore were "not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes." Id....

...The sentences were ordered nunc pro tunc to April 6, 1994. Notably, although the resentencing hearing was conducted pursuant to section 921.1401, Mr. Garner was resentenced with the possibility of parole, not with the possibility of judicial review after twenty-five years under section 921.1402. II. We review de novo the constitutionality of a sentence....

...Mack, a juvenile, was convicted of a single homicide crime, in addition to nonhomicide crimes, and sentenced to concurrent life sentences for murder and burglary. Mack, 313 So. 2d at 695. He was entitled to a sentencing review after twenty-five years under sections 921.1402(2)(a) and 775.082(1)(b) for the murder and burglary....

...opportunity for him to gain release from incarceration under the murder and burglary sentences." Id. (emphasis added). Mr. Garner's case is distinguishable from Mack because that case dealt with a juvenile who was resentenced with a review under section 921.1402, while Mr....

...Garner was resentenced with eligibility for parole. 7 While we held that Mr. Mack's consecutive sentences eliminated "meaningful opportunity" for release where Mr. Mack was resentenced with a judicial review under section 921.1402, the supreme court has specifically held that "Florida's statutory parole process fulfills Graham's requirement that juveniles be given a 'meaningful opportunity' to be considered for release during their natural life based upon 'normal parole factors.' " Franklin, 258 So....

...th Hegwood v. State, 308 So. 3d 647, 648 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020), in which the Fourth District considered the case of a juvenile who committed three murders in 1987 and, after a supreme court remand for resentencing under sections 775.082, 921.1401, and 921.1402, was resentenced to life in prison with a twenty- five-year minimum for each of the murders. The resentencing court ordered that Mr. Hegwood was not entitled to judicial review under section 921.1402 until he had served seventy-five years....

...under Miller and Michel where Mr. Hegwood would be provided judicial review after each life sentence. Id. at 648-49. Mr. Garner's sentences are compatible with Hegwood. Again, unlike Mr. Hegwood, Mr. Garner was not resentenced with judicial review under section 921.1402, but rather was resentenced with the possibility of parole....

...determined that a life sentence is not appropriate. But the trial court found that Bailey intended to kill the victim and accordingly imposed a fifty-year sentence with review after twenty-five years as set forth in sections 775.082(1)(b)(1) and 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2014)....

...vides for a forty-year minimum sentence with review after twenty-five years if the trial court finds that the juvenile had 1In 2014, the legislature responded to Miller by amending section 775.082 and enacting sections 921.1401 and 921.1402....

...such person shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of at least 40 years. A person sentenced pursuant to this subparagraph is entitled to a review of his or her sentence in accordance with s. 921.1402(2)(a). (Emphasis added.) Section 921.1402(2)(a) provides for a "review of his or her sentence after 25 years" unless the defendant has been convicted of an enumerated offense during a separate criminal transaction or episode. Bailey challenges the trial cour...

...death penalty. And Bailey will be in -5- his early forties when he receives review of his sentence after twenty-five years, and an opportunity for early release, under sections 775.082(1)(b)(1) and 921.1402(2).3 The Miller holding does not extend to Bailey's sentence imposed pursuant to section 775.082(1)(b)(1), where he received the individualized sentencing hearing required by Miller (codified in section 921.1401(1)) and where he will receive a review of his sentence after twenty-five years....

...and is reasonably believed to be fit to reenter society, the court is authorized to modify the sentence by releasing the juvenile based on maturity and rehabilitation but must impose a term of probation of at least five years. § 921.1402(7), Fla....

...Nonetheless, the juvenile offender would be entitled to a judicial review and possible release in twenty-five years. -6- hearing pursuant to section 921.1401 and is later afforded periodic judicial review of his or her sentence as provided in section 921.1402"); Montgomery v....

...5th DCA 2017) (holding that "the mandatory twenty-five-year minimum sentence [imposed pursuant to 10-20-Life statute] does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment when applied to a juvenile offender as long as he or she gets the mandated judicial review" required under section 921.1402); St....

...He contends that the statute and Miller make clear that the trial court is required to consider the factors as they relate to Bailey's circumstances. Section 775.082(1)(b)(3) provides that "[t]he court shall make a written finding as to whether a person is eligible for a sentence review hearing under s. 921.1402(2)(a) or (c)....

...neither claim warranted relief. This appeal followed. 3. Thomas’s resentencing was required under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016), and Florida’s updated juvenile sentencing statute, section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2016). -4-  ANALYSIS We need not address the trial court’s timeliness analysis because we agree with the trial court’s findings on the merits....

...neither claim warranted relief. This appeal followed. 3. Thomas’s resentencing was required under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016), and Florida’s updated juvenile sentencing statute, section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2016). -4-  ANALYSIS We need not address the trial court’s timeliness analysis because we agree with the trial court’s findings on the merits....

judicial review after 25 years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(a), (b), Florida Statutes (2021). Singletary

SCALES, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 921.1402(6), Fla. Stat. (2022) (providing a list of enumerated

(2010), and seeks resentencing pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2015). The trial court

involves only a ministerial act”); see also § 921.1402(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (mandating that “[a] juvenile

with s. 921.1402(2)(a). (Emphasis added.) Section 921.1402(2)(a) provides for a "review of his or

Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphases added). Section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2018), states, in pertinent

the applicable sentence review provisions of section 921.1402 of the Florida Statutes. 5 Reversed

sentence review after 25 years pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes. 3 This appeal

twenty-year sentencing review pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2016). See Barnes

years' imprisonment. Relying on section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, and rule 3.802(b)(3), Elkin

years' imprisonment. Relying on section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, and rule 3.802(b)(3), Elkin

resentencing. See § 775.082(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2016); § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2016); see also Kelsey v.

his original sentencing in accordance with section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2018). See Robinson

his original sentencing in accordance with section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2018). See Robinson

review on this count after fifteen years under section 921.1402(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2015).

later conducted sentence review pursuant to § 921.1402 and determined that the juvenile offender was

judicial review of the sentence pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2021). We reverse the order

should be sentenced to life imprisonment; and section 921.1402 was created to allow for subsequent judicial

separate from the one involving the murder. See § 921.1402(2)(a)(4), (5), Florida Statutes (2017) ("A

to review of his life sentence pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2014). Blake

not therefore entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. In State v. Michel , 257

not therefore entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. In State v. Michel

not therefore entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. In State v. Michel , 257

subsequent sentence review proceeding.” Id.; see also § 921.1402(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2022) (“[T]he court shall

sentence review hearing held pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2015), it failed to consider

claims entitlement to sentence review based on section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2023). He claims that

should be eligible for sentence review under section 921.1402—Florida’s post-Graham juvenile sentencing

twenty-five (25) years in accordance with section 921.1402(2), Florida Statutes (2023). Having reviewed

entitled to review of his sentence under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2017). We write to explain

sentence review hearing in the future under section 921.1402(2)(d), Florida Statutes (2014). That statute

Application. A juvenile offender, as defined in section 921.1402(1), Florida Statutes, may seek a modification

mandatory for a trial court to conduct the review. § 921.1402(6).")

twenty-five years (not seventy-five years) under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. Id. at 649. That same

See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B). Section 921.1402(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2015), provides that

(Fla. 1st DCA 2019). The plain meaning of section 921.1402 dictates that Hegwood is entitled to a review

1402(2)(d).” § 775.082(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2019). Section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2019), provides that “[a]

with the required judicial review pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. On appeal, appellant

review after twenty years, pursuant to section 921.1402(2)(d), to afford him or her a meaningful

section 921.1401, Florida Statutes (2014), and section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2015). Reversed and

section 921.1401, Florida Statutes (2014), and section 921.1402, Florida Statutes (2015). Reversed

there is no legal basis to retroactively apply section 921.1402 (or any other provision of the juvenile sentencing

additional language is added to reference section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, and to specify that the

State, 175 So.3d 380, 382 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015); § 921.1402(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2015). However, the sentencing

Fla. Stat. (2017) (emphasis added). Section 921.1402(2), Florida Statutes (2017), provides in pertinent

judicial review after twenty-five years under section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes. The court also imposed

a disqualifying conviction under section 921.1402(2)(a), Florida Statutes, Appellant will be

was “entitled to judicial review pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, after fifteen (15) years

are not entitled to resentencing under section 921.1402, Florida Statutes. Michel, 257 So. 3d