THOMAS MITCHELL SMITH, 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.
The court held that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act permits a trial court to impose a sentence under the Habitual Felony Offender statute concurrently, operating the PRR Act as a mandatory minimum.
Appellant was convicted of robbery and qualified for sentencing as both a Prison Releasee Reoffender (PRR) and an Habitual Felony Offender (HFO). The …
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 Habitual Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals his conviction and sentence for robbery. We affirm and certify conflict.
Appellant robbed a bank one day after being released from prison in 1997. He qualified as both a Prison Releasee Reoffender (“PRR”) and as an Habitual Felony Offender (“HFO”)- The trial court imposed a 30-year HFO sentence with a 15-year minimum mandatory under the PRR Act. The court found that the PRR Act permitted a trial court to sentence a defendant as both a PRR and HFO for one offense.
In the PRR Act, the Legislature wrote, “Nothing in this subsection shall prevent a court from imposing a greater sentence of incarceration as authorized by law, pursuant to s. 775.084 or any other provision of law.” Sec. 775.082(8)(c), Fla. Stat. (1997).1 We find that this subsection allows a trial court to impose an HFO sentence on a PRR when the defendant qualifies under both statutes. It does not require a trial court to choose between one or the other. When a defendant receives a sentence like the one in this case, the PRR Act operates as a mandatory minimum sentence. It does not create two separate sentences for one crime.
Because we find that a 30-year HFO sentence with a 15-year minimum mandatory under the PRR Act does not violate Double Jeopardy, we certify conflict with the decision in Adams v. State, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).2 We also certify the same question that we certified in Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 740 So. 2d 529 (Fla.1999), regarding the constitutionality of the PRR Act.
AFFIRMED; conflict certified; question certified.
JOANOS, MINER and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR. . The PRR Act is now codified at section 775.082(9), Florida Statutes (1999).
. The sentence imposed in Adams was identical to the one imposed in this case. We do not certify conflict with Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), because of the different sentencing scheme imposed in that case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (31 total)
-
Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)…arm to run concurrently with an HFO sentence for offenses occurring within a single criminal episode). The Second District recognized this similarity in its decision in this case. See Grant, 745 So. 2d at 522. The First District, in Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), applied the same analogy. In Smith, the defendant was convicted of robbery and sentenced to thirty years as a habitual felony offender, with a concurrent fifteen-year mandatory minimum term as a prison releasee reof-fender. The…1 / 2
-
Reeves v. State, 957 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 2007)…f both a PRR and an HFO sentence for the same offense did not violate double jeopardy because "the PRR Act operates as a mandatory minimum sentence. It does not create two separate sentences for one crime.” 770 So. 2d at 658 (quoting Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100, 101 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)); cf. Jackson v. State, 659 So. 2d 1060, 1062-63 (Fla.1995) (holding that a defendant could receive a mandatory minimum sentence for possession of a firearm to run concurrently with an HFO sentence for offenses occurring wit…
-
Walls v. State, 765 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…adjudicated and sentenced as a habitual felony offender. His five concurrent life sentences under the prison releasee reoffender statute are otherwise affirmed. In reaching the above result, we find no conflict between this case and Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Adams v. State, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), petition for review filed, No. 00-18 (Fla. Jan. 3, 2000); or Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), petition for review filed, No. 00-686 (Fla. Mar. 29, 2000), non…
Previewing 3 of 31 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)
- Pollock v. Couffer, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Vashon Oland Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)