Walton v. State
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of two counts of attempted murder of a law enforcement officer with possession and discharge of a firearm during commission of that crime and two counts of attempted armed robbery with possession of a firearm during commission of that crime. The trial court vacated its initial sentencing order and resentenced Defendant to two terms of thirty years for the attempted murders with mandatory minimum sentences of twenty years and two terms of fifteen years for the attempted armed robberies with mandatory minimum sentences of ten years. The court ordered that all sentences and mandatory minimums run consecutively. The First District Court of Appeal reversed Defendant’s sentences because he was not present at resentencing but otherwise found the sentences proper. The Supreme Court quashed the First District’s decision and remanded for a new trial, holding (1) the First District erred in concluding that section 775.087 required Defendant’s sentences to be imposed consecutively, irrespective of whether Defendant fired, carried, or displayed a firearm; (2) the trial court committed fundamental error by failing to instruct the jury on attempted manslaughter as a lesser included offense of second-degree murder; and (3) the suggestive identification procedure employed in this case gave rise to a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.