CARLOS MARRERO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Habitual Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Carlos Marrero (defendant) appeals from an order of the trial court denying his motion to correct illegal sentence. He contends that the trial court erred in imposing a ten year habitual offender sentence upon his conviction for the offenses of unlawful sale or delivery of cocaine and possession of cocaine. The trial court properly denied the motion with respect to the sentence imposed in count one for unlawful sale or delivery of cocaine. See Williams v. State, 667 So. 2d 914, 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)(habitual offender adjudication permissible where defendant was convicted of violation of section 893.13, Florida Statutes, for sale [rather than purchase or possession] .of cocaine). However, the state correctly concedes that the trial court erred in imposing a habitual offender sentence as to the conviction in count two for the offense of possession of cocaine. See Pittman v. State, 733 So. 2d 594, 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Accordingly, we vacate the habitual offender sentence imposed as to this count alone and remand with instructions to re-sentence the defendant within the applicable sentencing guidelines.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 2001)…strict also has corrected as illegal a similar error that occurred when the defendant received a habitual offender sentence for possession of cocaine, another offense that does not qualify for habitualization under the statute. See Marrero v. State, 741 So. 2d 634, 635 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Ellis v. State, 703 So. 2d 1186, 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). In Bover, however, a decision that was issued after Beaudoin and Ellis but before Marrero, the Third District appears to have taken a more narrow view of what consti…1 / 2
-
Austin v. State, 756 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…d 663 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 664 So. 2d 248 (Fla.1995), and recently granted such relief in an analogous claim, that of improper habitualization for a drug possession charge when the statute does not allow such sentencing, see Marrero v. State, 741 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). So far as we can determine, the third district has not receded from Beaudoin, and the first, second, and fifth districts also all consider the habitualization of a life felony committed at a time when the statute did not permit h…
-
Knight v. State, 882 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…ssive to his prior claims. Nevertheless, the motion was properly denied because that claim was [*1082] without merit. See, e.g., Adams v. State, 724 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Paul v. State, 830 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Marrero v. State, 741 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Williams v. State, 667 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). WARNER, POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 667 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Jones v. State, 733 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)