DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TASHEEM T. DAVIS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D16-0296

[July 5, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Glenn D. Kelley, Judge; L.T. Case No. 13CF004753AMB.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Narine N. Austin, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jessenia J. 

Concepcion, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

DAMOORGIAN, J.

Tasheem Davis appeals his conviction and sentence for one count of 

robbery with a firearm and one count of burglary of an occupied 

conveyance while armed with a firearm. Both offenses stemmed from a 

single criminal episode during which Appellant possessed, but did not 

discharge, a firearm. Appellant was sentenced to fifteen years with a ten 

year mandatory minimum for the robbery charge, and five years with a 

three year mandatory minimum for the burglary charge. The trial court, 

believing that it was constrained to do so pursuant to our original holding 

in Williams v. State, 125 So. 3d 879 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013), imposed both 

mandatory minimum sentences consecutively. We affirm Appellant’s 

convictions without further comment, but for reasons discussed below,

remand for imposition of concurrent mandatory minimum prison terms.

“Section 775.087, Florida Statutes, commonly referred to as the 10-20-

Life statute, provides for mandatory minimum sentences for offenders who 

possess or use a firearm in some manner during the commission of certain 

crimes.” Mendenhall v. State, 48 So. 3d 740, 746 (Fla. 2010). As to how 

sentences are to be imposed under the 10-20-Life statute, the statute
2

provides:

It is the intent of the Legislature that offenders who actually 

possess, carry, display, use, threaten to use, or attempt to use 

firearms or destructive devices be punished to the fullest 

extent of the law, and the minimum terms of imprisonment 

imposed pursuant to this subsection shall be imposed for each 

qualifying felony count for which the person is convicted. The 

court shall impose any term of imprisonment provided for in 

this subsection consecutively to any other term of 

imprisonment imposed for any other felony offense.

§ 775.087(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2016) (emphasis added).

In Williams v. State, 125 So. 3d 879, 884 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013), we held 

that based on the language in the above quoted subsection (2)(d), a trial 

court is required to impose the mandatory minimum sentences for 

qualifying felonies which occur during the same criminal episode

consecutively. During the pendency of this appeal, the Florida Supreme 

Court quashed our decision in Williams and held that “consecutive 

sentencing of mandatory minimum imprisonment terms for multiple 

firearm offenses is impermissible if the offenses arose from the same 

criminal episode and a firearm was merely possessed but not discharged.” 

186 So. 3d 989, 993 (Fla. 2016).

In the present case, it is undisputed that Appellant did not discharge a 

firearm when committing the multiple qualifying offenses. Accordingly, 

the “trial court must impose the mandatory minimum sentences 

concurrently under such circumstances.” Williams, 186 So. 3d at 993. 

We accordingly affirm Appellant’s convictions but remand for imposition 

of concurrent mandatory minimum prison terms. See Azor v. State, 192 

So. 3d 1255, 1255 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part.

CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.