BRADLEY v. STATE (2019)

Appellant was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, resulting from one criminal episode involving one victim, in which three or four shots were fired. The trial court imposed consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences under section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (10-20-Life); and Appellant challenged that aspect of his sentence on appeal. Pursuant to Walton v. State, 208 So.3d 60 (Fla. 2016), and Williams v. State, 186 So.3d 989 (Fla. 2016), we remanded for the trial court to exercise its discretion as to whether Appellant's minimum-mandatory sentences should be concurrent or consecutive. Bradley v. State, 223 So.3d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). The trial court re-entered consecutive sentences. After that hearing and while this appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court decided Miller v. State, 265 So.3d 457, 2018 WL 4784069 (Fla. Oct. 4, 2018). In that case, the supreme court clarified its post-Williams cases as holding that consecutive sentences are permissible for single-episode crimes only when there are either multiple victims or multiple injuries—neither of which was the case here. Miller, 265 So.3d at 459, 2018 WL 4784069 at *2. We followed that precedent in Fleming v. State, 260 So.3d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019), remanding for resentencing with concurrent minimum-mandatory sentences; and we do so again now.

Reversed and Remanded for resentencing.

Per Curiam.

Rowe, Osterhaus, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.