DAVID E. KING, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that habitual felony offender status is a sufficient reason for departure from sentencing guidelines.
Appellant was convicted of armed robbery and determined to be a habitual felony offender, leading to a sentence departure from the recommended guideli…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Predicate Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of three counts of armed robbery, determined to be a habitual felony offender under section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1985), and sentenced to twenty-five years on each robbery count to run concurrently. Appellant had previously been convicted of four third degree felonies and one misdemeanor. The guidelines recommended sentence was seven to nine years. The reason given for the guidelines departure was appellant’s habitual offender status. The predicate felony for the determination that he was a habitual felony offender was factored into the guidelines. Thus, appellant contends that his conviction was counted twice contrary to the rule of Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla.1985).
Based upon this court’s holding in Ferguson v. State, 481 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), we affirm. Recognizing that other courts have ruled differently on this matter, see e.g., Teague v. State, 491 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) and Vicknair v. State, 483 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), we adhere to Ferguson and again certify as a matter of great public importance the following question:
IS THE DETERMINATION OF A DEFENDANT AS A HABITUAL FELONY OFFENDER PURSUANT TO SECTION 775.084 A SUFFICIENT REASON FOR DEPARTURE FROM THE RECOMMENDED RANGE OF THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES?
RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
King v. State, 520 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…that departure sentence and this court affirmed the trial court’s decision to depart but certified as a question of great public importance whether the appellant’s departure sentence could be justified by his habitual offender status. King v. State, 494 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). The supreme court answered that question in the negative stating: “section 775.084 cannot operate as an alternative to guidelines sentencing ... nor can the habitual offender statute remain viable as a reason for departure_” The…
-
King v. State, 502 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 1987)…EHRLICH, Justice. We review King v. State, 494 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), in which the district court upheld departure from the presumptive guideline sentence based on King’s habitual offender status, under section 775.-084, Florida Statutes (1985), and certified the following question as being of grea…
Authorities Cited
- Hendrix v. State, 475 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1985)
- Vicknair v. State, 483 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Vera v. State, 481 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Ferguson v. State, 481 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Teague v. State, 491 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)