BRIAN G. LEBOEUF, 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 sentence was improper because the state failed to prove the required prior felony convictions.
Leboeuf was convicted of robbery and sentenced as a habitual offender. His prior convictions were for crimes committed during the same period, and adj…
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
W. SHARP, Judge.
Leboeuf appeals his conviction for robbery and his enhanced sentence (pursuant to the habitual offender statute) of thirty years. The crimes for which he was being sentenced were committed on February 15, 1989, while the 1988 version of the habitual offender statutes was in effect,1 and prior to the time the 1989 habitual offender statute became law.2 We strike the sentence and remand for resentencing, on the au thority of Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).
The record here establishes that Leboeuf was previously convicted of multiple crimes committed during February and March of 1984, but was adjudicated and sentenced on one day for all of them. Thus, as in Taylor, the state failed to prove that Leboeuf had been previously convicted of two prior felonies, and that a second felony conviction was imposed for a crime committed after the initial felony conviction.
Accordingly, we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. In all other regards, we affirm the judgment.
AFFIRMED; sentence VACATED and REMANDED for resentencing.
PETERSON and GRIFFIN, • JJ., concur. . Section 775.084(l)(a)l, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988) states:
The defendant has previously been convicted of two or more felonies in this state.
. Section 775.084(l)(a)l, Florida Statutes (1989) states: The defendant has previously been convicted of any combination of two or more felonies in this state or other qualified offenses.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ozell Debose, Jr. v. State, 580 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…version of the habitual offender statute, the State must establish that the defendant has been convicted of two or 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…
-
Reyes v. State, 573 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…ad previously been convicted of twelve felonies, but each felony was contained in the same judgment of conviction. Thus, none of the prior felonies could have been committed after the date of the initial felony conviction. See also Leboeuf v. State, 571 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Walker v. State, 567 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). In the instant case, since both prior felonies resulted in convictions rendered on March 27, 1987, the second prior felony could not have been committed after the date of the i…
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)