TERRY JOE SLOAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Double Jeopardy Clause cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Terry Joe Sloan appeals his adjudication as a habitual felony offender under section 775.084, Florida Statutes (Supp.1988).
We conclude that the trial court’s oral findings at the sentencing hearing satisfied the statutory requirements. See Parker v. State, 546 So. 2d 727 (Fla.1989).
Defendant also asserts that the habitual offender statute violates the double jeopardy clauses of the Florida and the United States Constitutions because it enhances his punishment based on his previous convictions. That argument was not made below, but in any event, has been rejected previously. Reynolds v. Cochran, 138 So. 2d 500, 503 (Fla.1962); Washington v. Mayo, 91 So. 2d 621, 623 (Fla.1956); Cross v. State, 96 Fla. 768, 781-87, 119 So. 380, 384-87 (1928); Perkins v. State, 583 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 1st DCA), jurisdiction accepted, 590 So. 2d 421 (Fla.), review pending, No. 78,613 (1991); Tillman v. State, 586 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA) (certifying question), review pending, No. 78,715 (Fla.1991); Jolly v. State, 590 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA) (certifying question), review pending, No. 79,121 (Fla.1991).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boyles v. State, 608 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…ecord, history and the likelihood of rehabilitation under the juvenile system. However, the court failed to reduce its findings, based on its analysis, to writing and therefore this court remanded the case for such written findings. Boyles v. State, 593 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), citing § 39.111(7)(d), Fla.Stat. (1989). On remand the trial court again found that factors five and six, did not apply. However, the written order provided reflects that those factors apply. Additionally, the written order do…
-
Eleby v. State, 615 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…r as to the prior convictions as required by section 775.-084(l)(a)(3) & (4), Florida Statutes (1989), and, second, that the habitual offender statute violates the principal of double jeopardy. As to the latter, we find no merit. See Sloan v. State, 593 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA1992). As to the former, the appellant concedes in her brief that the trial court made the required findings as per section 775.047(l)(a)(l) & (2), Florida Statutes, (1989), and indeed, this finding is spread across the pages of the reco…
Authorities Cited
- Cross v. State, 96 Fla. 768 (Fla. 1928)
- Timmie Lewis Parker v. State, 546 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 1989)
- Isaiah Perkins v. State, 583 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Ishmael Washington v. Mayo, 91 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 1956)
- Reynolds v. Cochran, 138 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1962)
- Leshawn Tillman v. State, 586 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Jolly v. State, 590 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- King v. Byrd, 590 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)