GROVER FLOYD STEINER, 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.
Court affirmed habitual violent felony offender conviction under Florida Statutes § 775.084, holding that three admitted Florida felony convictions were sufficient to support habitualization without reaching the sufficiency of evidence for an alleged Indiana felony.
Three admitted Florida felony convictions are sufficient to support habitualization under the habitual violent felony offender statute without requiring proof of an out-of-state conviction.
[1] Admitted prior felony convictions are sufficient to support habitualization under the habitual violent felony offender statute without requiring proof of additional out-o…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Steiner admitted to three prior felony convictions in Florida but vigorously denied an alleged felony conviction in Indiana that was used to…
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 Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
WOLF, Judge.
Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence used to prove he had previously been adjudged guilty of a felony in Indiana. He also challenges the constitutionality of section 775.084, Florida Statutes (Supp.1988), the habitual violent felony offender statute. Appellant admitted to three prior felony convictions in the state of Florida, but he vigorously denied the alleged felony which was to have occurred in Indiana.
Because the Florida convictions, which the appellant admits, are sufficient to justify him being habitualized under the felony offender statute, we need not reach the issue of whether or not the evidence in establishing the Indiana felony was suffi cient. See Robinson v. State, 551 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) rev. denied, 562 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1989) (any error in failing to corroborate a 1986 conviction was harmless given appellant’s extensive record of felony convictions). We also find no merit in the appellant’s attacks on the constitutionality of the habitual violent felony offender statute. Arnold v. State, 566 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1990); Johnson v. State, 564 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); King v. State, 557 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 564 So. 2d 1086 (Fla.1990).
AFFIRMED.
SMITH and BARFIELD, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Caracciolo v. State, 557 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Arnold v. State, 566 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Delrick Johnson v. State, 564 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Robinson v. State, 551 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)