TERRELL LEE PALMORE, 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.
Florida appellate court vacated habitual felony offender sentence because prior convictions were simultaneous and postdated the instant offenses, violating statutory requirements for predicate convictions.
Simultaneous convictions cannot satisfy the statutory requirement of two or more prior convictions for habitual offender enhancement, and convictions postdating the instant offenses are invalid as predicates.
[1] Simultaneous convictions do not satisfy the statutory requirement of two or more prior convictions under the habitual offender statute.
[2] Convictions entered after the commission of the instant offenses cannot serve as valid predicate offenses for habitual offender enhancement.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePalmore was sentenced as a habitual felony offender based on prior convictions that all occurred on the same date and were entered after he committed …
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 Predicate Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Palmore challenges his sentence as a habitual felony offender on the grounds that 1) the prior convictions all occurred on the same date, 2) the convictions used to enhance his sentence were entered after the appellant committed the instant offenses, and 3) the lower court used a juvenile adjudication as one of the predicate offenses. We need not address the question of whether or not the trial court appropriately relied on a juvenile adjudication. The result in this case is controlled by Barnes v. State, 576 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), which holds that use of simultaneous convictions does not satisfy the statutory requirement of two or more prior convictions under the habitual offender statute. Furthermore, we find that Palmore’s sentence must be reversed under Brooks v. State, 578 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), as the offenses for which the appellant was sentenced occurred before the date of the convictions upon which the lower court relied as “prior convictions.” See also Snowden v. State, 449 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), quashed on other grounds in State v. Snowden, 476 So. 2d 191 (Fla.1985).
We therefore vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.
WIGGINTON and WOLF, JJ., and WENTWORTH, Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thadius Lee Gregory v. State, 618 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…ce this court has approved the consideration of subsequent convictions in determining whether a defendant is a habitual offender. Smith v. State, 584 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.2d DCA 1991), review denied, 595 So. 2d 557 (Fla.1992); but cf., Palmore v. State, 584 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (convictions entered after date offenses at sentencing occurred could not be relied on as prior convictions). The appellant also argues that the written judgment and sentences fail to reflect the court’s oral pronouncement at s…
Authorities Cited
- Barnes v. State, 576 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Snowden v. State, 449 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- State v. Snowden, 476 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 1985)
- Brooks v. State, 578 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)