DAVID BROOKS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Unconstitutional Vagueness cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, J.
Brooks first argues that the Prison Re-leasee Reoffender Act (section 775.082(9), Florida Statutes (1999)) is unconstitutional based on a separation of powers defect and because it is unconstitutionally vague. We affirm the trial court on the issue of vagueness. See Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), rev. granted, 740 So. 2d 529 (Fla.1999). We also affirm on the separation of powers argument based on Speed v. State, 122, So. 2d 17 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), but, as we did in Robinson v. State, 742 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), we certify the issue to the Florida Supreme Court.
Brooks next argues, and we agree, that it was error to enhance his sentence both under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act and under the habitual offender statute. See Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106, (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). We reverse the habitual offender enhancement sentence on the record as it now exists. If, however, the Supreme court rules the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act is unconstitutional, then this reversal is without prejudice in considering any future sentence.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and issue CERTIFIED.
COBB, J., and ORFINGER, M„ Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. State, 770 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…that it was double jeopardy to sentence him as both a habitual felony offender and as a prison release reoffender for the same crime. The State concedes that this court has previously ruled in favor of the defense on this issue. See Brooks v. State, 753 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Both the First and Second Districts have adopted the opposite [*723] view. Wright v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly D 992, - So. 2d -, 2000 WL 424053 (Fla. 1st DCA April 20, 2000), certified conflict. Although we reverse for resente…
-
Brooks v. State, 787 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2001)…LEWIS, J. We have for review Brooks v. State, 753 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We vacate the decision of the district court and remand for reconsideration upon application of our decisions in Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000); State v. Cott…
-
Brooks v. State, 790 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…HARRIS, J. Pursuant to the mandate in Brooks v. State, 787 So. 2d 831 (Fla.2001), we reconsider our previous opinion, Brooks v. State, 753 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), in light of Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000); State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla.2000); McKnight v. State, 769 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 2000); and Ellis v. State, 762 So. 2d 912 (Fla.2000), and reinstate Brooks’ habitual off…
Authorities Cited
- Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Vashon Oland Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Robinson v. State, 742 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Ervin v. State, 742 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)