St. Petersburg Robbery Defense Lawyer

Serving Clearwater, Tampa and Surrounding Areas

  • Generally

Robbery is a very serious crime against the person of another. Robbery involves the taking of money or other property from the victim through the use of force or violence. The "force" or "violence" used must be part and parcel with the taking to sustain a robbery conviction. In other words, if the taking of the victim's property occurs subsequent to the use of force or violence, and as an afterthought, a robbery charge is not appropriate. A theft charge, however, would be.

Most robbery offenses will score mandatory prison on Florida's sentencing guidelines without regard to additional charged offenses or prior record. Whether the crime occurred in St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Tampa, or a surrounding area, robbery is an offense that is prosecuted very aggressively. Early intervention by a qualified Tampa Bay area criminal defense attorney can have a significant impact on the outcome of your case. What follows is an overview of the various robbery offenses in Florida, the elements of each charge, the maximum penalties authorized by law, recidivist sentencing provisions, relevant case law, and a list of related articles.

If in the course of committing a robbery, the person carried a firearm or other deadly weapon, the robbery is a felony of the first degree, punishable by up to life in prison. If in the course of committing the robbery, the person carried a weapon (something other than a firearm), then the robbery is a felony of the first degree. A first-degree felony is punishable by up to thirty years in state prison. If in the course of committing the robbery, the person carried no firearm, deadly weapon, or other weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the second degree. A second-degree felony is punishable by up to fifteen years in state prison. The jury instructions below define "firearm", "weapon" and "deadly weapon".

Home invasion robbery is essentially a robbery that occurs inside the dwelling of another. Here again, the use of a firearm during the commission of the crime equates to a potential life sentence. If the perpetrator uses a weapon, he or she commits a felony of the first degree (punishable by up to thirty years in state prison). If the perpetrator uses no weapon or firearm, the crime is still a first degree felony, but the offense level for sentencing guideline purposes is lower. An experienced St. Petersburg area criminal defense attorney can explain sentencing guideline matters in greater detail.

Robbery by sudden snatching involves the taking of property from the person or custody of the victim where the victim is aware of the taking or becomes aware of it. This offense is usually charged in situations where the accused grabs the victim's purse and takes off running. Under Florida law (as set forth below), the state is not required to prove that the accused person used any degree of force beyond that necessary to obtain possession of the item. In other words, the taking of the property does not have to be violent in nature. Also, there does not need to be any resistance offered by the victim or a showing that the victim was injured in some way. This makes sense as a robbery by sudden snatching usually occurs pretty quickly and before the victim even knows what is happening. It is hard to resist the taking when the accused person has the item and is already twenty feet into a a full sprint, in an effort to get away.

Here, the maximum penalties are a bit different. If the accused person used a firearm or deadly weapon, the offense is a felony of the second degree, which is punishable by up to fifteen years in state prison. If no firearm or other deadly weapon is used, the offense is a felony of the third degree, which is punishable by up to five years in state prison.

St. Petersburg criminal defense attorney Donald J. Kilfin has handled countless robbery offenses as both a Pinellas county state prosecutor and a Tampa Bay area criminal defense attorney. If you have been arrested or charged with robbery, contact our office to discuss the circumstances or your case, including potential defenses, sentencing guideline matters, minimum mandatories, and any potential sentencing enhancements.

  • Applicable Florida Statutes

The following is a list of Florida statutes that pertain to Robbery offenses, as set forth in Chapter 812:

  • Florida statute § 812.13 (Robbery) provides as follows:

(1)(a) "Robbery" means the taking of money or other property which may be the subject of larceny from the person or custody of another, with the intent to either permanently or temporarily deprive the person or the owner of the money or other property, when in the course of taking there is the use of force, violence, assault, or putting in fear.

(2)(a) If in the course of committing the robbery the offender carried a firearm or other deadly weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (b) If in the course of committing the robbery the offender carried a weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (c) If in the course of committing the robbery the offender carried no firearm, deadly weapon, or other weapon, then the robbery is a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3)(a) An act shall be deemed "in the course of committing the robbery" if it occurs in an attempt to commit robbery or in flight after the attempt or commission. (b) An act shall be deemed "in the course of taking" if it occurs either prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking of the property and if it and the act of taking constitute a continuous series of acts or events.

  • Florida statute § 812.131 (Robbery by sudden snatching) provides as follows:

(1) "Robbery by sudden snatching" means the taking of money or other property from the victim's person, with the intent to permanently or temporarily deprive the victim or the owner of the money or other property, when, in the course of the taking, the victim was or became aware of the the taking. In order to satisfy this definition, it is not necessary to show that: (a) the offender used any amount of force beyond that effort necessary to obtain possession of the money or other property; or (b) there was any resistance offered by the victim to the offender or that there was injury to the victim's person.

(2)(a) If, in the course of committing a robbery by sudden snatching, the offender carried a firearm or other deadly weapon, the robbery by sudden snatching is a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (b) If, in the course of committing a robbery by sudden snatching, the offender carried no firearm or other deadly weapon, the robbery by sudden snatching is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, s. 775.084.

(3)(a) An act shall be deemed "in the course of committing a robbery by sudden snatching" if the act occurs in an attempt to commit robbery by sudden snatching or in fleeing after the attempt or commission. (b) An act shall be deemed "in the course of taking" if the act occurs prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking of the property and if such act and the act of taking constitute a continuous series of acts or events.

  • Florida statute § 812.135 (Home-invasion robbery) provides as follows:

(1) "Home invasion robbery" means any robbery that occurs when the offender enters a dwelling with the intent to commit a robbery, and does commit a robbery of the occupants therein.

(2)(a) If in the course of committing the home invasion robbery the person carries a firearm or other deadly weapon, the person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (b) If in the course of committing the home invasion robbery the person carries a weapon, the person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. (c) If in the course of committing the home invasion robbery carries no firearm, deadly weapon, or other weapon, the person commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s.775.083, or s. 775.084.

  • Applicable Jury Instructions

The following is a list of each element of each variation of robbery offense, which the state must prove as a condition precedent to a finding of guilt:

  • Florida Standard Jury Instruction 15.1 (Robbery) provides as follows:

To prove the crime of robbery, the state must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) The defendant took the (money or property described in charge) from the person or custody of (person alleged).

(2) Force, violence, assault, or putting in fear was used in the course of the taking.

(3) The property taken was of some value.

(4) The taking was with the intent to permanently or temporarily [deprive (victim) of [his][her] right to the property or any benefit from it][appropriate the property of (victim) to [his][her] own use or to the use of any person not entitled to it.

Definitions

  • Assault. § 784.011 Fla. Stat. Give if applicable.

An"assault" is an intentional and unlawful threat, either by word or act, to do violence to a victim, when it appears the person making the threat has the ability to carry out the threat, and the act creates in the mind of the victim a well founded fear that violence is about to take place.

  • Fear. Give if applicable. Smithson v. State, 689 So.2d 1226 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

If the circumstances were such as to ordinarily induce fear in the mind of a reasonable person, then the victim may be found to have been in fear, and actual fear on part of the victim need not be shown.

  • In the course of taking

"In the course of taking" means that the act occurred prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking of the property and that the act and the taking of the property constitute a continuous series of acts or events.

  • Afterthought. Give if applicable. DeJesus v. State, 98 So.3d 105 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2012).

If you find that the taking of the property occurred as an afterthought to the use of force or violence against the victim, the taking does not constitute robbery but may still constitute theft.

  • Title to Property. Give if applicable.

In order for a taking of property to be a robbery, it is not necessary that the person robbed be the actual owner of the property. It is sufficient if the victim has the custody of the property at the time of the offense.

  • Force. Give if applicable.

The taking must be by the use of force or violence or by assault so as to overcome the resistance of the victim, or by putting the victim in fear so that the victim does not resist. The law does not require that the victim of robbery resist to any particular extent or that the victim offer any actual physical resistance if the circumstances are such that the victim is placed in fear of death or great bodily harm if he or she does resist. But unless prevented by fear, there must be some resistance to make the taking one done by force or violence.

  • Victim unconscious. Give if applicable.

It is also robbery if a person, with the intent to take the property from a victim, administers any substance to another so that the victim becomes unconscious and then takes the property from the person or custody of the victim.

  • Taking. Give if applicable.

In order for a taking by force, violence, or putting in fear to be robbery, it is not necessary that the taking be from the person of the victim. It is sufficient if the property is under the actual control of the victim so that it cannot be taken without the use of force, violence or intimidation directed against the victim.

  • Enhanced penalty. Give if applicable.

If you find the defendant guilty of the crime of robbery, you must further determine beyond a reasonable doubt if "in the course of committing the robbery" the defendant carried some kind of weapon. An act is "in the course of committing the robbery" if it occurs in an attempt to commit robbery or in flight after the attempt or commission.

  • With a firearm.

If you find that the defendant carried a firearm in the course of committing the robbery, you should find [him][her] guilty of robbery with a firearm.

A "firearm" means any weapon [including a starter gun] which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; [the frame or receiver of any such weapon;][any firearm muffler or firearm silencer;][any destructive device;][any machine gun]. [The term "firearm" does not include an antique firearm unless the antique firearm is used in the commission of a crime. An antique firearm is (insert definition in § 790.001(1), Fla. Stat.)] [A destructive device is (insert definition in § 790.001(4), Fla. Stat.)].

  • With a deadly weapon.

If you find that the defendant carried a (deadly weapon described in charge) in the course of committing the robbery and that the (deadly weapon described in charge) was a deadly weapon, you should find [him][her] guilty of robbery with a deadly weapon.

A weapon is a "deadly weapon" if it is used or threatened to be used in a way likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

  • With other weapon.

If you find that the defendant carried a weapon that was not a firearm or deadly weapon in the course of committing the robbery, you should find [him][her] guilty of robbery with a weapon.

A "weapon" is defined to mean any object that could be used to cause death or inflict serious bodily harm.

  • With no firearm or weapon.

If you find that the defendant carried no firearm or weapon in the course of committing the robbery, but did commit the robbery, you should find [him][her] guilty only of robbery.

  • Florida standard jury Instruction 15.3 (Home-invasion robbery) provides as follows:

To prove the crime of home invasion robbery, the state must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) The defendant entered the dwelling of (victim).

(2) At the time the defendant entered the dwelling, [he][she] intended to commit robbery.

(3) While inside the dwelling, the defendant did commit robbery.

  • Florida standard jury instruction 15.4 (Robbery by sudden snatching) provides as follows:

To prove the crime of robbery by sudden snatching, the state must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) The defendant took the (money or property described in charge) from the person of (person alleged).

(2) The property was of some value.

(3) The taking was with the intent to permanently or temporarily deprive (victim) or the owner of [his][her] right to the property.

(4) In course of the taking, (victim) was or became aware of the taking.

In the course of taking means that the act occurred prior to, contemporaneous with, or subsequent to the taking of the property and that the act and the taking of the property constitute a continuous series of acts or events.

  • Potential Sentencing Enhancements

Under the Prison Releasee Re-Offender statute, as set forth in s. 775.082(9)(a), a person who commits (or attempts to commit) an enumerated offense, including home invasion robbery or robbery, within three years of release from a state or federal prison, must be sentenced to the statutory maximum. Thus, where a person is charged with home invasion robbery, the court would have no choice but to sentence the person to life in the Florida Department of Corrections upon the entry of a guilty (or no contest) plea, or a finding of guilt by a the jury. For strong arm robbery, a second degree felony, the court would have no choice but to sentence the person to fifteen years.

Under the Habitual Violent Felony Offender statute, as set forth s. 775.084(1)(b), a defendant who has previously been convicted of an enumerated felony, including robbery, and the pending felony for which the defendant is to be sentenced was committed either: (a) while the defendant was serving a prison or other sentence that was imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated felony (including robbery); or (b) within five years of the date of conviction of the last prior enumerated felony (including robbery), or within five years of the defendant's release from a prison sentence, probation, community control, control release, conditional release, parole, or other sentence that is imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated felony (including robbery), whichever is later, will be subject to certain sentencing enhancements. In the case of a life felony or a felony of the first degree, the defendant may be sentenced to life and shall not be eligible for release for fifteen years. In the case of a second degree felony, for a term not exceeding thirty years, and the defendant shall not be eligible for release for ten years. In the case of a felony of the third degree, the defendant may be sentenced to a term not exceeding ten years and shall not be eligible for release for five years.

Under the Three Time Violent Felony Offender statute, as set forth in. s. 775.084(1)(c), the court must impose certain mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment if it finds that (1) the defendant has previously been convicted two or more times of an enumerated felony (or an attempt to commit an enumerated felony - home invasion robbery and robbery), and (2) the felony for which the defendant is to be sentenced is an enumerated felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery) and was committed: (a) while the defendant was serving a prison sentence or other sentence imposed as a result of a conviction for an enumerated felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery); or (b) within five years of the date of conviction of the last prior enumerated felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery), or within five years of the defendant's release from a prison sentence, probation, community control, control release, conditional release, parole, or other sentence imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated offense (including home invasion robbery and robbery), whichever is later. The court must sentence a three time violent felony offender as follows: in the case of a felony punishable by life, to a term of imprisonment for life; in the case of a felony of the first degree, to a term of imprisonment of thirty years; in the case of a felony of the second degree, to a term of imprisonment of fifteen years; and in the case of a felony of the third degree, to a term of imprisonment of five years.

Under the Violent Career Criminal statute, as set forth in s. 775.084(1)(d), the court must impose certain mandatory terms of imprisonment if it finds that: (1) the defendant has previously been convicted three or more times for an offense in this state that is a forcible felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery) or other enumerated offense; (2) the defendant has been incarcerated in a state or a federal prison; (3) the primary felony offense for which the defendant is to be sentenced is an enumerated felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery), was committed on or after October 1st, 1995, and (a) while the defendant was serving a prison or other sentence that was imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery); or (b) within five years of the date of conviction of the last prior enumerated felony (including home invasion robbery and robbery), or within five years of the defendant's release from a prison sentence, probation, community control, control release, conditional release, or parole, or other sentence that is imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated felony, whichever is later. Where such findings are made, the court must sentence the violent career criminal as follows: in the case of a life felony or a felony of the first degree, for life; in the case of a felony of the second degree, for a term of years not exceeding forty with a mandatory minimum term of thirty years imprisonment; in the case of a felony of the third degree, for a term of years not exceeding fifteen, with a mandatory minimum of ten years imprisonment.

Under Florida's 10-20-Life statute, as set forth in s. 775.087, any person who is convicted of a felony or an attempt to commit a felony, regardless of whether the use of a weapon is an element of the felony, the conviction was for an enumerated offense, including home invasion robbery and robbery, and during the commission of the offense such person actually possessed a firearm, shall be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of 10 years, except that a person who is convicted of aggravated assault, possession of a firearm by a felon, or burglary to a conveyance shall be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of three years if such person possessed a firearm during the commission of the offense. Where the person discharges the firearm, he or she must be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of twenty years. Where the person discharges the firearm or destructive device and, as a result of such discharge, death or great bodily harm is inflicted upon any person, the defendant shall be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of twenty five years and not more than a term of imprisonment of life in prison.


Few events in life rival the stress and anxiety of a criminal charge. We are here to help. If you have been arrested for Robbery, or for some other offense, contact The Kilfin law Firm, P.C. for a free initial consultation. Experienced legal representation can have a significant impact on the outcome of your case.


  • Relevant Case Law

  1. DeJesus v. State, 98 So.3d 105 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2012). In DeJesus, the appellant was charged with robbery, battery, and assault. The evidence at trial established that the appellant and a co-defendant beat up the victim at the home of a mutual female friend. After the beating, the appellant and the co-defendant took the victim's wallet, cell phone, blue-tooth ear piece, and car keys. At trial, the appellant requested a special jury instruction on "afterthought", as follows: "If the evidence shows that the taking of property occurred as an 'afterthought' to the use of force or violence against the victim, the taking does not constitute robbery but may still constitute theft". The trial court refused to give the instruction and the appellant was convicted of robbery. The court of appeals reversed the appellant's conviction on the robbery count and remanded it for a new trial, holding that the proposed special jury instruction should have been given based, on the evidence and testimony introduced during the course of the trial.
  2. Smithson v. State, 689 So.2d 1226 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). In Smithson, the appellant went into an Orlando area convenience store and pointed a gun at the sales clerk. The appellant stated that he did not intent to hurt the sales clerk, he just wanted a beer. The appellant (while still armed) and the clerk went to the cooler where the appellant took a bottle of beer and consumed it. The clerk was able to escape and police arrested the appellant thereafter. At the appellant's ensuing trial for robbery with a firearm, the clerk testified that he was not in fear of harm. The state requested, and the court read, the following special proposed jury instruction: "If the circumstances were such as to ordinarily induce fear in the mind of a reasonable person, then the victim may be found to have been in fear, and actual fear need not be precisely shown". The court of appeals affirmed the conviction holding that an "objective" approach to whether the victim was put in fear is not inappropriate, citing Brown v. State, 397 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)(the victim's statement that she was not afraid is not controlling; the question is not whether the victim actually feared the appellant, but whether a jury could conclude that a reasonable person under like circumstances would be sufficiently threatened to accede to the robber's demands).
  • Defenses to Your St. Petersburg, Clearwater, or Tampa Area Robbery Charge

As with many types of criminal offenses, lack of sufficient identification may be the most viable defense, and one of the first places your attorney would want to look for potential proof problems. The viability of an "ID" defense will depend on several factors, including the number of witnesses, the reliability of any out of court identifications, and any inculpatory statements the accused made to police. There are a number of questions your attorney will want to have answers to in evaluating the merits of the state's case against you. Was the accused person wearing a mask? Was the crime committed at night? If so, what were the lighting conditions like in the area the witness purportedly made his or her observations? If the crime occurred in a business establishment (such as a bank) is there a video recording? Does anyone remember what the accused was wearing? Did the accused have any visible markings or other identifying features such as a tattoo? Did the suspect flee the scene in a vehicle? If so, what was the make, model, and color? Did anyone get the tag number? Did the suspect act alone? If not, can witnesses provide physical descriptions of the purported accomplices? Were any items used in the commission of the crime recovered? If so, can they be tied to the accused (for example DNA on a mask or gloves, or through the serial number on a firearm)?

The relationship between the victim and the accused will always play a role here as well. For example, a perfect stranger is much less likely to falsely accuse another person, whereas one who has had prior difficulties with the accused, or is somehow biased against the accused, just might. Depending on the nature of the relationship, and the parties' history, an apparent motive to fabricate can provide a basis for a very viable defense, given the right set of facts.

An alibi will often strengthen what is an already solid ID defense. Where state witness identifications are not reliable, and the accused has made no incriminating statements, defense witnesses who can place the accused at another location, which would make it impossible to have committed the crime, can be very effective. Of course, the alibi would need to be virtually airtight as a crafty prosecutor could completely unravel it by subpoenaing cell tower records, bank statements, and other evidence of a similar nature. Six alibi witnesses placing the defendant in Las Vegas at the time the crime was committed won't mean much when the state has photos of the defendant withdrawing money from an ATM machine three blocks from the crime scene, five minutes after it occurred.

Obviously, an otherwise viable ID defense may be compromised where the accused person admits to the commission of the crime. In these instances, every effort should be made by the defense attorney to determine whether a motion to suppress the statements should be filed. This is done where it can be shown that the person's fifth amendment right against self incrimination, or sixth amendment right to counsel, was violated, or that the statement was coerced.

Another potentially viable defense, where ID is not an issue, may be the "afterthought" defense, as set forth above. Where the force or violence occurs after the taking of money of other property, and as an afterthought, robbery is not an appropriate charge, but theft is. Theft offenses are much less serious than robbery offenses as they lack the "force" or "violence" element. Theft offenses will also avoid many of the recidivist sentencing statutes that may otherwise be applicable. For example, theft will not trigger a PRR enhancement, whereas robbery or carjacking will. That alone could make all difference in the outcome of the case.

Effective pre-filing negotiations are crucial where it appears that the state can prove its case. As stated above, a theft charge will not invoke the same enhancements that a robbery charge will and, where such enhancements would otherwise apply, the filing of a lesser charge may reduce the person's sentence by many years. A lessor charge will also have an impact on the minimum and maximum possible sentences as dictated by Florida's sentencing guidelines. Depending on the person's prior record and the nature of the charge filed, a lessor offense may result in a withhold of adjudication or perhaps acceptance into a diversion program.

The applicable defenses will depend on the underlying circumstances and no two cases are alike. What may be a viable defense in one case, may not be in another. An experienced St. Petersburg area criminal defense attorney can discuss the defenses that may be available in your case and issues related to pre-filing negotiations, sentencing guidelines, minimum mandatories, and enhancements.

  • Resources

The following is a list of outside sources, prior blog posts, and other website sections on topics related to robbery offenses:

  • Links
  1. HG. Org: Florida Sentencing Enhancements Pt. 1: Prison Releasee Re offenders
  2. HG. Org: Florida Sentencing Enhancements Pt. 2: Habitual Felony Offenders and Habitual Violent Felony Offenders
  3. HG. Org: Florida Sentencing Enhancements Pt. 3: Three Time Violent Felony Offenders and Violent Career Criminals
  4. HG. Org: Florida Sentencing Enhancements Pt. 4: 10-20-Life
  • Blog Posts
  1. Do I need a St. Petersburg Criminal Defense Attorney?
  2. They Never Read Me My Rights - Can My Charge Be Dismissed?
  3. Inchoate (Incomplete) Crimes: Attempt, Solicitation and Conspiracy
  4. Florida's Principal Statute: All For One and One For All
  5. Florida's William's Rule: What Is It and What Does It Mean For My Criminal Case?
  6. Pre-Trial Release In Florida: The Basics
  7. Speedy Trial in Florida: An Overview
  8. Search and Seizure in Florida: An Overview
  9. Florida Sentencing Guideline Departures: Youthful Offenders
  10. Florida Sentencing Guideline Departures: Unsophisticated/Isolated/Remorse
  11. Florida Sentencing Guideline Departures: Need for Restitution
  12. Florida Sentencing Guideline Departures: Legitimate, Uncoerced Plea Bargain
  • Related Sections
  1. Alibi as a Defense to Your St. Petersburg, Clearwater, or Tampa Area Criminal Charge
  2. Affecting the Filing Decision
  3. Pre-trial Diversion
  4. Withholding of Adjudication
  5. Plea Negotiations
  6. Defensive Motions
  7. Trial
  8. Sentencing
  9. Probation Violations
  10. Violent Felony Offenders of Special Concern
  11. Assault & Aggravated Assault
  12. Theft
  13. Carjacking
  • The Bottom Line

Robbery is always a felony offense in Florida. With the exception of strong arm robbery and robbery by sudden snatching, all robbery offenses in will score mandatory prison on Florida's sentencing guidelines. A charge of strong arm robbery or robbery by sudden snatching may also score prison if there are other offenses before the court for senctencing, or if the person has a significant criminal history. Use of a firearm during the commission of the crime will invoke the priovisions of Florida's 10-20-Life statute and unlike burglary, all robbery offenses involving the possession of a firearm will result in a 10 year minimum mandatory sentence. Depending on the person's prior record and release date from a state or federal prison, Florida's recivist sentencing enhancements may also apply. If you have been arrested for a Robbery offense in the Tampa Bay area, St. Petersburg criminal defense attorney Donald J. Kilfin can help. Contact The Kilfin Law Firm, P.C. to schedule an initial consultation.