GEORGE WALSH, 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 drug trafficking convictions but reversed the habitual offender sentence because three prior felony convictions used to enhance the sentence occurred on the same date, violating the requirement for sequential convictions under Florida law.
A defendant cannot be sentenced as a habitual offender based on prior felony convictions occurring on the same date; section 775.084(1)(a) requires that prior convictions be sequential or successive, with the first conviction preceding the commission of the subsequent offense.
[1] Under Florida Statutes section 775.084(1)(a), a habitual offender sentence requires sequential or successive prior convictions, meaning the first conviction must have occ…
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 intelligenceGeorge Walsh was convicted of trafficking in cocaine, conspiracy to traffic, and sale of a controlled substance for offenses committed on July 7 and J…
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 Conspiracy To Traffic cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, Judge.
George William Walsh appeals his convictions for trafficking in cocaine,1 conspiracy to traffic,2 and sale of a controlled substance 3 as well as his sentence as an habitual offender.4 We affirm the convictions, but reverse and remand the sentence because the defendant’s habitual offender status was predicated on three prior felony convictions occurring on the same date.
Because the defendant committed the offenses for which he is being sentenced on July 7 and July 11, 1989, the 1988 version of the habitual offender statute governs. This court has previously held that section 775.084(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1988)5 requires sequential or successive convictions, in the sense that the first conviction must have occurred prior to the commission of the second offense. Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). A like result was reached by our sister courts in Barnes v. State, 576 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) and Walker v. State, 567 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).
Convictions AFFIRMED; Sentence REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.
GRIFFIN and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur. . § 893.135(l)(b)l, Fla.Stat. (1989).
. §§ 893.135(l)(b)l and 893.135(4), Fla.Stat. (1989).
. § 893.13(l)(a)l, Fla.Stat. (1989).
. § 775.084, Fla.Stat. (1989).
. Section 775.084(l)(a) states in pertinent part:
(a) "Habitual felony offender" means a defendant for whom the court may impose an extended term of imprisonment, as provided in this section, if it finds that:
1. The defendant has previously been convicted of two or more felonies in this state;
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harrison v. State, 585 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…der. Both sides to this appeal agree that, under the 1988 version of the Habitual Offender Act, the state must show that the second prior conviction was imposed for an offense committed after the date of the initial prior conviction. Walsh v. State, 579 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Valentine v. State, 577 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Barnes v. State, 576 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Reyes v. State, 573 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Williams v. State, 573 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Bernard v.…
-
Perry v. State, 776 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…d her were so inflammatory and prejudicial as to have caused an unfair trial atmosphere. Other witnesses also used the word “rape,” as did defense counsel. Use of the word “rape” at no time was objected to by the defense. See, e.g., Harold v. State, 579 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Defense cannot now claim error on this ground. See Norton v. State, 709 So. 2d 87 (Fla.1997). The defense further contends that it was improper to allow the prosecution to read a part of the victim’s deposition transcript conce…
-
Walsh v. State, 606 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…*641] years and permitted range of 9-22 years. The sentence imposed is vacated and the cause remanded for resentencing using a corrected scoresheet. SENTENCE VACATED; CAUSE REMANDED. DAUKSCH, COWART and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . See Walsh v. State, 579 So. 2d 908 (Fla.5th DCA 1991). . 164 points for primary offense at conviction, 13 points for additional offenses at conviction and 116 points for prior record.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Barnes v. State, 576 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Romerio Latee Walker v. State, 567 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Taylor v. State, 558 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)