STUART ERVING WADE, 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.
Wade was designated a sexual predator following his conviction for sexual battery offenses, but the court reversed because his crimes were committed in 1989-1990, before the Florida Sexual Predators Act took effect on October 1, 1993. The court held that sexual predator designation requires an offense committed on or after the Act's effective date.
Wade cannot be designated a sexual predator because his offenses were committed in 1989-1990, prior to October 1, 1993, and the statute requiring sexual predator designation applies only to offenses committed on or after that date.
[1] A sexual predator designation cannot be applied to offenses committed prior to the effective date of the Florida Sexual Predators Act.
[2] A sexual predator designation is not a sentence or punishment for purposes of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 criteria for sexual predator designation requires an offense committed on or after October 1, 1993.”
Establishes the statutory requirement for applicability of the Act
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWade was sentenced on three counts of sexual battery by a person under the age of eighteen on a child under the age of twelve following a violation of…
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 Florida Sexual Predators Act cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Judge.
Following a violation of probation, Stuart Erving Wade was sentenced on three counts of sexual battery by a person under the age of eighteen on a child under the age of twelve.1 Wade appeals his designation as a sexual predator and claims error because his offenses were committed prior to the passage of the Florida Sexual Predators Act. We agree and reverse.
The amended information and judgment in the record reveal that Wade’s offenses were committed in 1989 and 1990. The Florida Sexual Predators Act was first enacted in 1993 and took effect on October 1, 1993. See Ch. 93-277, § 6, at 2626, Laws of Fla. The criteria for sexual predator designation requires an offense committed on or after October 1, 1993. See § 775.23(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). Because Wade’s offenses were committed prior to October 1, 1993, we conclude that he did not meet the criteria for a sexual predator designation.
The State does not dispute the factual accuracy of Wade’s claim but asserts that Wade has failed to preserve this issue because he did not attack the designation by a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). However, a sexual predator designation is neither a sentence nor a punishment. See Burkett v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1630, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 374712 (Fla. 2d DCA July 8, 1998), review denied, 719 So. 2d 892 (Fla.1998). Therefore, Wade would not be entitled to seek relief under rule 3.800. See Angell v. State, 712 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.800 and 3.850 are not available to challenge erroneous designation as sexual predator). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to strike Wade’s designation as a sexual predator. Reversed and remanded with directions.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., Concur. . See § 794.011, Fla. Stat. (1989).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
King v. State, 911 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…om our prior opinions in Anderson v. State, 886 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Smeltz v. State, 818 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Jackson, 801 So. 2d 212; Coblentz, 775 So. 2d 359; State v. Colley, 744 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Wade v. State, 728 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); and Angell, 712 So. 2d 1132. [*234] To avoid any confusion, we explain that a sexual predator designation (1) may be imposed or modified after sentencing without regard to the time limits established in rule 3.800(c), see Collie,…
-
Moreland Nicholson v. State, 846 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…ction or a timely Rule 3.800(b) motion. In this case, however, given the State’s concession that the designation was erroneous, we herewith strike it. [*1220] Sexual predator designation STRICKEN. PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur. . In Wade v. State, 728 So. 2d 284, 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), the court found Rule 3.800 [*1219] inapplicable, but nevertheless reversed the designation, apparently concluding that preservation was not required. . Kelly v. State, 795 So. 2d 135, 138 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). This court has…
-
Lowery v. State, 98 So. 3d 163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…ses that occurred prior to October 1, 1993, the effective date of the Sexual Predator Act. See § 775.21(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1994) (stating that sexual predator act applies for a “current offense committed on or after October 1, 1993”); Wade v. State, 728 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (“Because Wade’s offenses were committed prior to October 1, 1993, we conclude that he did not meet the criteria for a sexual predator designation.”). The trial court noted that the information alleged the crimes took place betwee…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Geis v. Chira, 712 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)