Filed: Aug. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT GABRYL MARK SULLIVAN, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-5065 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed August 1, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Thomas P. Barber, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Stephen M. Grogoza, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney G
Summary: NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT GABRYL MARK SULLIVAN, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D16-5065 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed August 1, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Thomas P. Barber, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Stephen M. Grogoza, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney Ge..
More
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
GABRYL MARK SULLIVAN, )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D16-5065
)
STATE OF FLORIDA, )
)
Appellee. )
)
Opinion filed August 1, 2018.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for
Hillsborough County; Thomas P. Barber,
Judge.
Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender,
and Stephen M. Grogoza, Special
Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for
Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,
Tallahassee, and Susan M. Shanahan,
Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for
Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Gabryl Sullivan challenges his judgment and sentence for aggravated
battery causing great bodily harm with a deadly weapon. See ยงยง 775.087(1),
784.045(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016). Sullivan was convicted following a jury trial and
sentenced to seven years in prison. On appeal, Sullivan argues in part that the 2017
amendment to section 776.032, Florida Statutes, creating subsection (4), should apply
retroactively to his case and that his motion to dismiss based on immunity from
prosecution should be reconsidered under the statute as amended. This court's recent
opinion concluding that the 2017 amendment to section 776.032, Florida's Stand Your
Ground law, is procedural in nature and thus should be applied retroactively to pending
cases necessarily controls our decision here. See Martin v. State, No. 2D16-4468,
2018 WL 2074171, *4 (Fla. 2d DCA May 4, 2018), review pending, No. SC18-789.
Accordingly, as we did in Martin, we reverse Sullivan's judgment and
sentence and remand for a new immunity hearing under the 2017 statute with
instructions that if the trial court determines that Sullivan is not entitled to immunity, the
court shall deny his motion and reinstate Sullivan's conviction and sentence. We
recognize that the Third District Court of Appeal has recently held that the 2017
amendment to section 776.032 imposes a new legal burden on the State such that it
should be treated as a substantive change in the law which does not apply retroactively;
we therefore certify conflict with Love v. State, No. 3D17-2112,
2018 WL 2169980, *3-*4
(Fla. 3d DCA May 11, 2018), review pending, No. SC18-747.
Reversed and remanded with instructions; conflict certified.
KHOUZAM, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
-2-