Garry Bartlett Jr. admitted murdering his father, but no jury evaluated the claims he made about their family history.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Garry Charles Bartlett Jr.’s guilty plea answered the central legal question in his father’s death: He admitted committing second-degree murder with a weapon and accepted the possibility that he could spend the rest of his life in prison.
It did not answer every question raised in the police account. Bartlett, 29, alleged during an interview with Jacksonville detectives that his father sexually assaulted him in childhood and made another disturbing remark before the November 2024 shooting. Police said the childhood allegation had never been documented. Because Bartlett pleaded guilty instead of proceeding to trial, no jury was asked to decide whether those claims were credible, corroborated or legally relevant.
Duval County Circuit Court Judge Jeb Branham sentenced Bartlett to 45 years in state prison for killing 69-year-old Garry Charles Bartlett Sr. at the home they shared on Fawn Lake Drive. The sentence was imposed under a partially negotiated agreement that required at least 40 years in prison while leaving Branham the authority to impose any longer lawful sentence up to life.
The distinction between what was established and what remained alleged is central to an accurate account of the case. Bartlett’s responsibility for the killing is no longer merely an accusation because he entered a guilty plea and was convicted. His claims about his father, however, remain statements attributed to him in an arrest report. The publicly reviewed materials do not show that law enforcement verified them or that a court made findings about them. According to the arrest report obtained by Law&Crime, Bartlett told detectives that his father assaulted him between the ages of 5 and 9. Investigators noted that no prior documentation of the accusation had been located. The sources reviewed for this article do not identify a police complaint, child-protection record, criminal charge, civil proceeding or witness account that independently supports Bartlett’s claim.
Bartlett Sr. was dead by the time the allegation was made to homicide investigators and could not respond. That does not prove the allegation false, just as its inclusion in a police report does not prove it true. It means the public record available for this account supports only careful attribution: Bartlett made the accusation, and police described it as previously undocumented.
Bartlett also said his father made a comment involving sexual violence on the night before the killing, according to police. Investigators reported that the remark did not lead to an immediate physical confrontation. Bartlett instead went into his bedroom, listened to music and called a friend. He told detectives that he remained there thinking about the situation for six to eight hours.
After that period, Bartlett took a 9 mm handgun and walked into the living room, where his father was sitting on a couch, police said. He fired repeatedly. Bartlett told detectives that his father was still breathing after the first shots and that he fired another round. The arrest report preserved an explicit, profane description of that moment. A restrained paraphrase conveys the relevant fact: Bartlett said he deliberately shot again after hearing his wounded father breathe.
Investigators reported recovering 12 spent cartridge casings in the living room. They found Bartlett Sr. on the floor with multiple gunshot wounds and found the handgun on a bed in a back room. Police said two live rounds were jammed in the chamber and two others remained in the magazine. The available reports do not include the medical examiner’s full autopsy findings or a detailed forensic reconstruction.
Bartlett’s behavior after the shooting also formed an important part of the police account. He said he carried the handgun into the bedroom, placed it on the bed and lay down. He remained in the house for another six to eight hours before calling 911, according to the report. He did not report seeking medical help during that time.
When Bartlett eventually called, he told the dispatcher that he had shot his father and that the older man was dead. He said the gun was in the back bedroom and indicated that CPR was unnecessary. Those statements allowed responding officers to approach the home knowing that the caller claimed responsibility and had described where the weapon could be found. Police found Bartlett waiting in the front yard. A search of his clothing produced one fired 9 mm casing and one live round, the arrest report said. Officers entered the residence and found his father in the living room. Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department personnel pronounced Bartlett Sr. dead at the scene.
The recovery of physical evidence gave investigators information that did not depend solely on Bartlett’s memory or truthfulness. The casings documented numerous fired rounds. The gun was found where he said he had left it. Ammunition was recovered from his pocket. His father was found inside the home with injuries consistent with a shooting. Those facts supported the homicide investigation even as other parts of Bartlett’s account remained subject to verification.
The Sheriff’s Office took Bartlett into custody, and prosecutors pursued a charge of second-degree murder. Florida law defines that offense as an unlawful killing caused by an act imminently dangerous to another person and showing a depraved mind, without the premeditated design required for first-degree murder. It is a first-degree felony and may carry a sentence up to life.
The word “without” in that legal definition does not mean a defendant acted accidentally or without intent to commit the dangerous act. It distinguishes second-degree murder from a prosecution requiring proof of a premeditated design to kill. Bartlett’s admitted conduct, charge and plea were handled under the second-degree provision rather than a first-degree murder count in the reports reviewed for this article.
Had the prosecution gone to trial, jurors could have heard evidence about the scene, Bartlett’s statements and the events he said preceded the shooting. Defense lawyers could have challenged the state’s evidence and presented any admissible material supporting their position. Prosecutors could have tested the accuracy and legal significance of Bartlett’s abuse allegations. The judge would have instructed jurors on the law, and the jury would have returned a verdict. None of that occurred because Bartlett pleaded guilty. A guilty plea removes the need for a jury verdict and ordinarily requires the defendant to acknowledge the charge in open court after being advised of the rights being surrendered. The reports reviewed here do not provide a full transcript of Bartlett’s plea hearing, so his exact answers and the factual basis presented to Branham cannot be quoted.
The negotiated sentencing range also shaped the resolution. Bartlett did not receive a promise of precisely 40 years. He accepted a floor of 40 years and a ceiling of life. That left the defense able to argue for the minimum and the prosecution able to seek more, while giving the judge final authority within the agreed range.
Branham selected 45 years. The sentence was substantially below life but still five years longer than the minimum Bartlett had secured through the agreement. Law&Crime reported that he received credit for nearly two years spent in pretrial detention. The publicly available accounts do not provide a complete explanation from the judge or a full summary of the arguments presented at sentencing.
That missing hearing detail limits conclusions about the precise weight Branham gave any one factor. It would be speculative to state that the judge added five years because of the number of shots, the delay in calling 911, Bartlett’s final shot, his acceptance of responsibility or any other circumstance unless a transcript or sentencing order says so. The record establishes the outcome but not every step in the judge’s reasoning.
The plea also changed how Bartlett should be described. Before the plea, he was a defendant accused of murdering his father and entitled to the presumption of innocence. After the court accepted his guilty plea and entered judgment, he became a person convicted of the offense. The unresolved allegations he made do not undo that conviction or supply a legally established justification for the shooting.
First Coast News reported that the homicide stunned the Deer Cove neighborhood, a residential community on Jacksonville’s Southside. A neighbor said the family had seemed pleasant and generally kept to itself. Such observations offer limited community context, but they do not reveal what occurred privately inside the household before the killing.
The public record therefore ends with two different levels of certainty. The conviction and sentence are established court outcomes. The recovered firearm, casings, ammunition and body are documented parts of the investigation. Bartlett’s account of firing the shots is attributed to his police interview and reinforced by his plea. His allegations about childhood abuse remain unverified claims for which the available reports provide no independent confirmation. For now, Bartlett is due to serve the 45-year term in the Florida Department of Corrections, with credit for eligible time already spent in custody. No successful challenge had been publicly reported as of Saturday.
Author note: Last updated July 18, 2026.