BRYANT V. STATE

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2006 WILLARD BRYANT, ** Appellant, vs. ** ** THE STATE OF FLORIDA, CASE NO. 3D05-2332 ** Appellee. ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 79-9011 ** Opinion filed December 27, 2006. An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b) (2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, David H. Young, Judge. Willard Bryant, in proper person. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Michael E. Hantman, Assistant Attorney General for appellee. Before COPE, C.J., and GERSTEN and SUAREZ, JJ. On Motion for Rehearing COPE, C.J. By motion for rehearing defendant-appellant Bryant argues that he is entitled to a determination whether his 1979 second degree murder conviction is a first degree felony punishable by life imprisonment, or whether it was reclassified on account of the use of a firearm, and is therefore a life felony. The defendant argues that the level of felony makes a difference in his parole eligibility. several years prior As the defendant s crime date occurred to the adoption of the sentencing guidelines, the defendant has a parole-eligible sentence. The defendant has attached to his motion correspondence with the Florida Parole Commission, which appears to support his claim that the level of felony may make a difference to consideration by the Florida Parole Commission. We therefore reverse the order now before us in part and remand for the trial court to review the record and make a determination conviction is whether a life the defendant s felony (by second reason of degree murder reclassification pursuant to § 775.087(1), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1976)) or was not reclassified, and is therefore a first degree felony punishable by life imprisonment. Affirmed in part, reversed in further proceedings consistent herewith. 2 part, and remanded for

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.