DANIEL E. CREWS, 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 defendant is entitled to have a prior appellate decision applied to his case, requiring reconsideration of his habitual offender adjudication and sentence.
The defendant was sentenced as an habitual offender based on prior felony convictions. A subsequent appellate decision clarified the requirements for …
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 Prior Felony Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
In 1989 the defendant was sentenced as an habitual offender based on five prior felony convictions all entered on November 25, 1987. In 1990, this court, in Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) held that, to qualify under the habitual offender statute, a second prior felony had to have occurred after conviction for a first prior felony.
If the defendant does not qualify as an habitual offender, the twenty-five year term of incarceration he received would exceed the general statutory maximum for the offense of robbery, a second degree felony, which is fifteen years incarceration. While the defendant was sentenced before Taylor v. State, his appeal was pending at the time Taylor was decided. Therefore, the defendant is entitled to have Taylor applied in this case, to have his sentence vacated, and to have his habitual offender adjudication reconsidered in light of Taylor. The defendant’s scoresheet indicates pri-or felonies in addition to those entered on November 25, 1987. Therefore, upon re-sentencing, the State may be able, and should be given the opportunity, to establish that the defendant qualifies as an habitual offender as interpreted in Taylor. We reverse the habitual offender adjudication and the defendant’s sentence as an habitual offender and remand for further proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
COBB, J., and DANIEL, C.W., Judge, Retired, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ozell Debose, Jr. v. State, 580 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…r more felonies, and the sentences on those two or more felonies must not have been entered on the same date. See also LeBoeuf v. State, 571 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Bernard v. State, 571 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 5th [*640] DCA 1990); Crews v. State, 567 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). The rationale behind these cases is that the purpose of the habitual offender statute is to protect society against habitual criminals who continue to commit crimes after having been convicted and punished for previous crimes. T…
-
Doggett v. State, 584 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…as a habitual offender will not be affected by the [*117] Court’s earlier error in treating the six 1986 felony offenses as separate convictions. The state contends that the decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeals [sic] in Crews v. State, [567 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) ], establishes the authority of the Court to consider additional evidence on the defendant’s motion to correct his sentence. In Crews, the trial judge committed the same error, that is he sentenced the defendant as a habitual fel…
-
Freeman v. State, 773 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…abitual offender sentence on two grounds: 1) he was improperly habitual-ized for two offenses arising out of the same criminal episode; and 2) his sentence is illegal because it exceeds the statutory maximum penalty for the offenses. Crews v. State, 567 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). The trial court granted an evidentiary hearing on both grounds. The state conceded it had relied on two prior felonies contained in the same judgment of conviction to sente…
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)