From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McPherson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
May 23, 2014
138 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

Summary

stating that Miller was inapplicable because McPherson was sentenced to life in prison with parole eligibility after twenty-five years

Summary of this case from Landy v. State

Opinion

No. 2D13–192.

2014-05-23

Ira Demetrius McPHERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.



Ira Demetrius McPherson, pro se.



ALTENBERND, Judge.

Ira D. McPherson appeals the postconviction court's order summarily denying his motion seeking resentencing for a felony murder that occurred in 1994. He claims that his sentence to life imprisonment with parole eligibility after twenty-five years is cruel and unusual because he was sixteen at the time of the offense and was merely a principal to a felony murder.

The standard two-year period authorized for the filing of a postconviction motion in Mr. McPherson's case expired many years ago. Mr. McPherson claims that he can file an untimely motion because his claim is supported by a recent change in law that amounts to a newly established “fundamental constitutional right.” SeeFla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b)(2). He relies primarily on the United States Supreme Court decisions in Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, ––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012).

The decisions in Graham and Miller do not involve life sentences with parole eligibility after a term of years. See Atwell v. State, 128 So.3d 167, 169 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (holding Miller does not affect a sentence of life imprisonment with parole eligibility after twenty-five years); Lewis v. State, 118 So.3d 291 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (declining to apply Graham to a comparable sentence in a postconviction proceeding). Neither the Florida Supreme Court nor the United States Supreme Court has announced new law directed to a sentence like Mr. McPherson's. Accordingly, we conclude that the motion was untimely and without legal basis. See Jackson v. State, 849 So.2d 321, 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (“A retroactive change in the law must be announced by the Florida Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court to warrant post-conviction relief, not a sister intermediate court of appeal.”). Cf. LaFountain v. State, 83 So.3d 881 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (refusing postconviction relief for a juvenile's sentence of life without the possibility of parole for felony murder prior to the decision in Miller ).

Affirmed. CASANUEVA and SLEET, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

McPherson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
May 23, 2014
138 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

stating that Miller was inapplicable because McPherson was sentenced to life in prison with parole eligibility after twenty-five years

Summary of this case from Landy v. State
Case details for

McPherson v. State

Case Details

Full title:Ira Demetrius McPHERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Date published: May 23, 2014

Citations

138 So. 3d 1201 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

Citing Cases

Rembert v. State

See Ch. 2014-220, Laws of Florida. The trial court denied relief observing that Miller does not apply to a…

McPherson v. State

He also filed a motion for postconviction relief seeking resentencing in that case. The postconviction court…