Citrus County man's drug sentencing overturned due to contradictory statements by judge
Nelson's mugshot from Florida Department of Corrections website.
The appeal court's ruling noted, that during Nelson's sentencing, Judge Howard commented that what hurt Nelson most was the photographs of the guns, yet in the same statement, Judge Howard commented that no gun charges had been made against Nelson, and he didn't take the possession of the guns into account (see the comment below, in bold).
Nelson was sentenced to 87.23 months incarceration (a drug trafficking sentencing enhancement) on two charges to run concurrently (at the same time). Immediately after pronouncing this sentence, Judge Howard stated, according to the January 12, 2024 appeals court ruling, “And what hurts you the most, Mr. Nelson, was...the photographs of the guns. They did not charge with those. I did not take that into account; but why you did this, I do not know.” The court then imposed three-year sentences on the remaining felony counts, with the sentences to also run concurrently (at the same time) as the previous 87.23 months sentencings.
Nelson was sentenced in February 2022. He has been incarcerated at Putnam Correctional Institution in Palatka, Florida since April 6, 2022. His currect release date is set at December 30, 2028. The resentencing judge and the date of Nelson's resentencing has not been released at this time.
On November 3, 2020, a confidential informant paid Nelson $500 to purchase 4 ounces of cannabis. About a month later, the same confidential informant paid Nelson $1,500 to purchase 1 pound of cannabis. During both transactions, Nelson used his name and his personal cellphone, and the transactions took place at his Hernando, Florida residence. The confidential informant negotiated a third transaction with Nelson, to purchase 28 pounds of cannabis, with the purchase to occur on December 10, 2020. However, the third drug transaction never happened. Instead, the Citrus County Sheriff's Office served a drug search warrant at Nelson's residence on the same date and found 28.998 pounds of marijuana and two guns that Nelson was in legal possession of. Nelson had no prior criminal record at the time of his arrest, according to the appeal court's decision document.
The ruling stated that the appeal presented the question of "whether a trial court may rely on a defendant’s lawful firearm possession in sentencing him," and the ruling conluded that it may not, that courts "deprive defendants of due process when they rely on uncharged and unproven conduct during sentencing, and this principle holds especially true where the uncharged conduct is the lawful exercise of a constitutional right."
According to the ruling, during the February 2022 trial, the State presented two photos of firearms found in Nelson’s home, noting that “a possible murder a couple of months ago that was probably related to the sale of cannabis” had occurred in Citrus County. During the trial, the State did not argue that Nelson was connected to the murder, and no firearm-related charges were pursued against him.
Nelson was charged with three third-degree felonies: sale or possession of cannabis with intent to sell, unlawful use of a two-way communications device, and possession of a place for drug trafficking; one second-degree felony: trafficking in cannabis in excess of 25 pounds but less than 2,000 pounds; and one first-degree misdemeanor: possession of drug paraphernalia. Nelson, who had no prior criminal convictions, pled no contest to all the charges, with Nelson's attorneys asking for 36 months incarceration, and the State of Florida asking for 87.23 months of incarceration.
A previous court ruling regarding Judge Ric Howard: In a ruling on May 20, 2021, the Florida Supreme Court ordered that Judge Howard receive a public reprimand after Judge Howard admitted to the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC), that in private meetings with a Citrus County judicial candidate and her husband during 2019, he discouraged her from running against an incumbent judge, encouraging her to instead run against another incumbent judge or drop out of the race and seek an appointment through the Judicial Nominating Commission process. (The candidate did not take Judge Howard’s advice.) The Supreme Court Justices noted in the ruling that Judge Howard took full responsibility for his actions, had no history of violations since his appointment to the bench in 2002, and had no disciplinary history with the Florida State Bar. The justices disagreed with the JQC that Judge Howard violated Judicial Canon 7A(1)(b), ruling that he did not publicly endorse or publicly oppose a candidate.