LASHAWN MARTEZ CRAWFORD, 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.
Crawford challenges his 42-year sentence for robbery as imposed under Florida's violent career criminal sentencing scheme, arguing that the statute creating it (Chapter 95-182, the Gort Act) violates the single subject rule of the Florida Constitution by combining career criminal sentencing with civil remedies for domestic violence. The court affirms the sentence and upholds the constitutionality of the statute.
Chapter 95-182 does not violate the single subject rule. All portions of the legislation deal with remedies for acts that constitute crimes, and the overall purpose of the statute can be determined to be crime prevention, satisfying the single subject requirement under the test established in Burch v. State.
[1] A statute violates the single subject rule of article III, section 6, Florida Constitution, if it combines unrelated subjects.
[2] Legislation creating a violent career criminal sentencing scheme and providing civil remedies for victims of domestic violence does not violate the single subject rule wh…
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“All portions of the legislation in the instant case deal with remedies for acts which constitute crimes. Thus, as in Burch, the overall purpose of this statute can be determined to be crime prevention.”
Establishes the court's rationale for upholding the statute under the single subject rule—the unifying purpose of crime prevention applies to all provisions.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCrawford pleaded guilty to two counts of robbery while wearing a mask. At sentencing, he stipulated that he met the criteria for violent career crimin…
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 Article Iii, Section 6 Of The Florida Constitution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Lashawn Crawford challenges the sentence imposed after a guilty plea. Crawford argues that the session law which created the violent career criminal sentencing scheme, chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, is unconstitutional as a violation of the single subject rule in article III, section 6, Florida Constitution. We determine that chapter 95-182, known as the Gort Act, does not violate the single subject rule under the supreme court’s analysis in Burch v. State, 558 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1990), and affirm.
Crawford entered a plea of guilty to two counts of robbery while wearing a mask. At sentencing, he stipulated that he met the criteria as a violent career criminal based on prior judgments and sentences. The plea agreement called for a sentence to a term of years less than life. The trial court imposed a sentence of 42 years. Crawford now argues that chapter 95-182 violates the single subject rule because it combined the creation of the career criminal sentencing scheme with civil remedies for victims of domestic violence. This argument has been rejected and chapter 95-182 found constitutional in Higgs v. State, 695 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Hill v. State, 740 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). Contra Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), review granted, 717 So. 2d 538 (Fla.1998). We recently rejected a similar challenge to chapter 95-184, Laws of Florida. See Trapp v. State, 736 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). As in Trapp, all portions of the legislation in the instant case deal with remedies for acts which constitute crimes. Sections 1 through 7 of chapter 95-182, create and define the violent career criminal sentencing category and provide sentencing procedures and penalties. Sections 8 through 10 deal with civil remedies relating to domestic violence. The acts of domestic violence contained within these sections are criminal offenses. See § 741.28(1), Fla. Stat. (1997). All portions of the legislation in the instant case deal with remedies for acts which constitute crimes. Thus, as in Burch, the overall purpose of this statute can be determined to be crime prevention.
For the reasons expressed in Trapp, Higgs, and Hill we find the statute to be constitutional. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and sentences, but certify conflict with Thompson.
AFFIRMED; conflict certified.
WOLF, LAWRENCE and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Thompson, 750 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1999)…WELLS, J., dissenting. I dissent. I am persuaded by the reasoning of Judge Wolfs opinion in Trapp v. State, 736 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), as confirmed by the recent opinion in Crawford v. State, 743 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). In Trapp, the court states: All portions of the legislation in the instant case deal with remedies for acts which constitute crimes. While the latter sections of the bill deal with civil remedies relating to domestic violence,…
-
German Melgares v. State, 762 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…ida, violates Florida’s single subject rule, and that he is entitled to postconviction relief. This court has rejected the single subject challenge to chapter 95-182. See Higgs v. State, 695 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); see also Crawford v. State, 743 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Hill v. State, 740 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). But see Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted 717 So. 2d 538 (Fla.1998). We reject the defendant’s constitutional challenge on authority of Higgs. We…
-
Lashawn Martez Crawford v. State, 759 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 2000)…PER CURIAM. We have for review Crawford v. State, 743 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District Court of Appeal expressly declared constitutional chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, determining that such chapter law does not violate the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the…
Authorities Cited
- Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
- Burch v. State, 558 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1990)
- Caison v. State, 695 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 736 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Hill v. State, 740 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)