HARRY BOYD, 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.
Court affirmed denial of postconviction relief, holding that appellant's habitual violent felony offender adjudication was proper because his final discharge from the qualifying offense occurred within five years of the subsequent offense, even though initial release was more than five years prior, because parole violations resulted in recommitments within the statutory window.
A defendant's conviction qualifies as a habitual violent felony offense under Florida law when the final discharge from the prior qualifying offense occurs within five years of the subsequent offense, even if the initial release was more remote, because recommitments resulting from parole violations constitute commitments imposed as a result of the prior conviction.
[1] A defendant's prior conviction qualifies as a predicate for habitual violent felony offender status when the final discharge from the prior offense occurs within five yea…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“within 5 years of the defendant's release, on parole or otherwise, from a prison sentence or other commitment imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated felony”
Quoting Fla. Stat. § 776.084(l)(b)2. (1993) to establish the statutory requirement for habitual violent felony offender status
Boyd was released from prison on parole in California for a qualifying offense more than five years before his subsequent offense, but he violated par…
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 Parole Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, C.J.
We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion for postconviction relief in which he claimed that he had been erroneously adjudicated as a habitual violent felony offender. Specifically, appellant asserts that he had been released from prison for the qualifying offense more than five years prior to the offense for which he was habit-ualized. However, appellant ignores the fact that he had been released from the qualifying offense on parole in California and then violated parole twice, resulting in two subsequent imprisonments based upon the underlying offense. He was finally discharged on the qualifying offense while incarcerated pursuant to the parole violation, which discharge was within five years of the offense for which he was habitual-ized. Thus, his conviction was “within 5 years of the defendant’s release, on parole or otherwise, from a prison sentence or other commitment imposed as a result of a prior conviction for an enumerated felony. ...” § 776.084(l)(b)2., Fla. Stat. (1993)(emphasis added). The return to prison as a result of the parole violation constitutes a commitment imposed as a result of the prior qualifying conviction. Cf. Girtman v. State, 617 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).
Affirmed.
STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lewis v. State, 223 So. 3d 383 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…. 2d 479 (Fla. 2004); Robbins v. State, 816 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Hurlburt v. State, 807 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Cooper v. State, 902 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Hepburn v. State, 778 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Boyd v. State, 753 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Figueroa v. State, 632 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). WALLACE, LUCAS, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Girtman v. State, 617 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)