WILLIAM ENISER SLAY, 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 the habitual offender statute could not be used to enhance a guidelines sentence, as determined in Whitehead v. State.
The defendant was convicted of sexual battery and false imprisonment and sentenced to an enhanced sentence under the habitual offender statute. The se…
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 Guidelines Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Associate Judge.
The appellant, William Eniser Slay, was charged in a two-count information with sexual battery and kidnapping. Following a jury trial, in which he was convicted of sexual battery and the lesser included offense of false imprisonment, the trial court sentenced Slay to thirty years on the sexual battery count and ten years on the false imprisonment count, the sentences to run consecutively. The guidelines range was seven to nine years. The trial court departed from the presumptive sentence based upon the habitual offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1986).
Slay asserts that the trial court committed seven errors in the conduct of the trial and an error in the sentencing. We have considered the points urged by Slay and with the exception noted below find each meritless. Slay was sentenced on May 30, 1986, several months prior to the supreme court’s determination in Whitehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1986), that the habitual offender statute may not be used as a basis for enhancing a guidelines sentence.
Accordingly, we affirm Slay’s conviction but remand this matter for resentencing. The trial court is not, however, barred from imposing a departure sentence based upon reasons which are valid. Smith v. State, 503 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Hargrove, 552 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…iterate, “the state need not produce evidence to sustain a conviction. State v. Fuller, 463 So. 2d 1252, 1254 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). So long as the state shows the barest prima facie case, it should not be prevented from prosecuting.” State v. Bailey, 508 So. 2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 518 So. 2d 1273 (Fla.1987). The question for our resolution is whether the additional evidence from Embrey, that he assumed it was appellee who did the shooting because he recognized the car and the shirt sleeve a…
-
State v. Gale, 575 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…*761] The issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the traverse. On a pretrial motion to dismiss, “it is only necessary that the facts alleged by the state, viewing all inferences in favor of the state, constitute a prima facie case.” State v. Bailey, 508 So. 2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 518 So. 2d 1273 (Fla.1987). To traverse, the state is under no obligation to present additional facts consistent with guilt, but it must specifically deny the material facts as set forth in the motion to dismiss. S…
-
Morganti v. State, 510 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…classic case of elevation of form over substance. We are not the first court to consider this issue. The First District has, in several decisions, reached the same result we reach. Brooks v. State, 509 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Slay v. State, 508 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Allen v. State, 506 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Avery v. State, 505 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Johnson v. State, 503 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). The Second District appears also to have reached the same result. Smi…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Whitehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1986)
- State v. Bruner, 503 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Al Smith v. State, 503 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)