Case ID: so3d_198/html/0959-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SILBERMAN, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Ian MANUEL, Appellee.
    No. 2D15-3573.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Aug. 5, 2016.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Johnny T. Salgado, Assistant Attorney Geiieral, Tampa, for Appellant.
    Peter M. Dennis, Fort Myers, and Bryan A.'Stevenson of Equal Justice Initiative, Montgomery, Alabama, for Appel-lee.
   SILBERMAN, Judge.

The State appeals the order granting Ian Manuel’s motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Manuel challenged his sentence of sixty-five years in prison to be followed by two years of community control and eight years of probation for a robbery with a firearm that he committed in Í990 when he was thirteen years old. The order provides that Manuel is entitled to resentencing pursuant to Peters v. State, 128 So.3d 832, 851-55 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013).

Manuel is'also-serving a forty-year sentence for the life felony of attempted murder-with a firearm-that arose from the same incident as the robbery with a firearm. In Peters, the Fourth’ District determined that Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), created a statutory -anomaly ip which the maximum penalty for an aggravated first-degree felony is more harsh than the-sentence a juvenile who commits a life felony faces; therefore, the Eighth Amendment requires that a juvenile’s sentence for an aggravated first-degree felony committed ■during the time the statutory anomaly existed, between October 1, 1983, and July 1, 1995, not exceed forty years in prison. See 128 So.3d at 854-55. We agree with Peters to the extent that it requires Manuel to -be resentenced to. ho more than forty years in prison;.on the 1990 offense of robbery-with a firearm, in count one due to the statutory anomaly.- Thus, we affirm the trial court’s order.

Affirmed,

' CASANUEVA and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur. •