LAMARIAN JACKSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Single Subject Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
[*467] PER CURIAM.
Lamarian Jackson appeals his convictions and sentences for armed robbery and aggravated battery with a firearm. Finding no reversible error, we affirm. We write only to address Jackson’s challenges to the constitutionality of the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act, section 775.082, Florida Statutes (1997). He contends that this act violates the separation of powers clause and the single subject requirement of the Florida Constitution. We recently upheld the validity of this act against separation of powers, due process, and equal protection challenges. See Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). As we did in Woods, we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court:
DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOFFENDER PUNISHMENT ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION?
Jackson’s challenge to the constitutionality of section 775.082(8), Florida Statutes (1997), on the basis that it violates the single subject requirement of Article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution, is also without merit. We find that this act does not violate the single subject requirement of the Florida Constitution because each section of chapter 97-239, Laws of Florida, deals with reoffenders and does not' accomplish separate and disassociated objects of legislative effort. See Young v. State, 719 So. 2d 1010, 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
AFFIRMED.
JOANOS, ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (24 total)
-
Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)…the same legislative act.” Johnson, 616 So. 2d at 4. Here, as observed by the Second District in the decision below, all of the provisions of chapter 97-239, Laws of Florida (which created the Act) pertain to reoffen-ders. Accord Jackson v. State, 744 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Young v. State, 719 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Where, as here, there is a logical nexus between the statute’s various provisions, the single subject requirement of the Florida Constitution has not been violated. DOUBLE JE…
-
Verro Chambers v. State, 752 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…argument that the prison releasee reoffender act violates the single subject requirement of the Florida Constitution has been decided adversely to his position by this court and the Second and Fourth District Courts of Appeal. See Jackson v. State, 744 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 749 So. 2d 503 (Fla.1999); Grant v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); State v. Eckford, 725 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 4th DCA), review dismissed, 732 So. 2d 326 (Fla.1999); Young v. State, 719 So. 2d 1010, 1011-12 (Fla…
-
Walls v. State, 765 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION? Appellant’s contention that section 775.082(8) violates the single subject provision of the Florida Constitution has likewise been rejected. See Jackson v. State, 744 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, No. 96,308, 749 So. 2d 503 (Fla. Dec. 15, 1999); Young v. State, 719 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 727 So. 2d 915 (Fla.1999). As for appellant’s double jeopardy argument, we decline to reach this po…
Previewing 3 of 24 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Barfield v. State, 719 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Young v. State, 719 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)