JERRY D. NEWTON, 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.
Jerry Newton was convicted of four counts of kidnapping and four counts of armed robbery, with enhancements based on firearm use and habitual offender status. The court affirmed most convictions but remanded to correct the sentencing on the kidnapping counts because the habitual offender statute does not apply to life felonies.
The habitual felony offender statute does not apply to life felonies, so Newton's habitual offender sentences on the kidnapping counts (I-IV) must be corrected. However, the statute does apply to first-degree felonies punishable by a term of years not exceeding life, so the habitual offender sentences on the armed robbery counts (V-VIII) are valid and affirmed.
[1] The habitual felony offender statute does not apply to life felonies.
[2] The habitual felony offender statute permits the enhancement of first-degree felonies punishable by a term of years not exceeding life.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The habitual felony offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes, does not apply to life felonies.”
Establishes that habitual offender sentencing cannot be imposed on life felonies, requiring reversal of sentences on kidnapping counts.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNewton was convicted of four counts of kidnapping under Florida Statutes section 787.01(1)(a), which were enhanced to life felonies under section 775.…
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.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm in all respects, except we remand to the trial court with directions to correct Newton’s habitual offender sentences as to counts I-IV.
Newton was convicted of four counts of kidnapping pursuant to section 787.01(l)(a), Florida Statutes, and these convictions were enhanced to life felonies pursuant to section 775.087(l)(a), Florida Statutes, because Newton used a firearm during the kidnappings. The habitual felony offender statute, section 775.084, Florida Statutes, does not apply to life felonies. See Walker v. State, 580 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Johnson v. State, 568 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Therefore, we remand to the trial court to correct Newton’s sentences for counts I-IV to reflect that he was not sentenced as an habitual offender on those counts.
We affirm Newton’s habitual offender sentences as to counts V-VIII. Newton was sentenced as an habitual offender on four counts of armed robbery, a felony of the first degree punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment, pursuant to section 812.13(2)(a), Florida Statutes. We align ourselves with the third and fifth districts in holding that the habitual felony offender statute does permit the enhancement of first-degree felonies punishable by a term of years not exceeding life. See Westbrook v. State, 574 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Paige v. State, 570 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). We note that this decision conflicts in this respect with the first district’s interpretation of the habitual felony offender statute in Barber v. State, 564 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and Gholston v. State, 16 F.L.W. 46 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 17, 1990).
LETTS, GUNTHER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Burdick v. State, 594 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1992)…f appeal have held, that first-degree felonies punishable by a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment are subject to enhancement under the habitual offender statute.9 See Lock v. State, 582 So. 2d 819, 819 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Newton v. State, 581 So. 2d 212, 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Westbrook v. State, 574 So. 2d 1187, 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Paige v. State, 570 So. 2d 1108, 1109 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). We also hold that sentencing under sections 775.084(4)(a)(l) and 775.084(4)(b)(l) is permissive, not…
-
Cameshia Byrd v. BT Foods, Inc., 948 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…moving for summary judgment in state court, requiring the movant to: “[S]how conclusively that no material issues remain for trial.” Visingardi v. Tirone, 193 So. 2d 601, 604 (Fla.1966), see 5G’s Car Sales, Inc. v. Florida Dep’t of Law Enforcement, 581 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Green v. CSX Transp., Inc., 626 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). In November 2003, Byrd began employment as a cashier at a Wendy’s restaurant owned by BT Foods. Early on, Byrd told her supervisor, Rose Johnson, that she was HIV p…
-
Lamont v. State, 597 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…); Johnson v. State, 568 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Barber v. State, 564 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 576 So. 2d 284 (Fla.1990); SECOND DISTRICT: Ledesma v. State, 528 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); FOURTH DISTRICT: Newton v. State, 581 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 4th DCA), juris, accepted, 589 So. 2d 291, and 292 (Fla.1991); Walker v. State, 580 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA), juris, accepted, 589 So. 2d 292 (Fla.1991); FIFTH DISTRICT: Power v. State, 568 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). . Parker v. State,…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Barber v. State, 564 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Easter v. State, 568 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Walker v. State, 580 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Paige v. State, 570 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Westbrook v. State, 574 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)