SAMMY BLANDS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• State v. Rogers, 556 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
  …verse the sentence and remand for resentencing because in sentencing appellee the trial court relied on the guidelines in effect at the time of the sentence as opposed to those in effect at the time of the commission of the crime. State v. Williams, 546 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). We reject appellant’s challenge to the constitutionality of the statute under which he was convicted because he did not raise it in the trial court when he pled no contest and did not raise the issue below. Furthermore, the co…
• Roberson v. State, 555 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
  …also McCaskell v. State, 542 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (amended rule 3.988 creating the permitted ranges was a substantive change in the law which should have prospective effect only for purposes of ex post facto clause). In State v. Williams, 546 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), the Fourth District Court of Appeal recently held that the permissive ranges could not be applied ex post facto to an offense occurring prior to the effective date of amended rule 3.988. The trial court in Williams had used the…
• State v. Whiddon, 554 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
  …ender affected by it.” (Emphasis added, footnotes omitted.) Consequently, it is our opinion that the state has no standing to pursue an ex post facto challenge. Accord Roberson v. State, 553 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). But see State v. Williams, 546 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (court approved state’s ex post facto argument, without addressing issue of standing). Second, the application of the amended guidelines to Whiddon’s offenses, which occurred before the revised guidelines’ effective date, did no…

Authorities Cited

• Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
• Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)