Cherry v. State
Cherry challenged his 25-year mandatory minimum enhancement for second-degree murder under section 775.087(2), arguing under Erlinger v. United States that the enhancement required a jury finding not made below. The Third DCA affirmed, holding the claim was refuted by the record because the jury verdict itself found that Cherry discharged a firearm causing great bodily harm or death, and separately holding that Erlinger does not apply retroactively to sentences that were already final when Erlinger was decided.
Key facts
- Cherry was convicted of second-degree murder and received a 25-year mandatory minimum enhancement under section 775.087(2) for discharging a firearm.
- Cherry filed a postconviction motion challenging the enhancement, arguing under Erlinger v. United States that the enhancement required a jury finding that was not made at trial.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion is useful to practitioners litigating post-Erlinger challenges to mandatory minimum firearm enhancements under section 775.087(2), particularly the growing wave of 3.800/3.850 motions arguing that… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.