PHILLIP FREDERICK TAYLOR, 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 appellant's sentence was properly imposed and affirmed the conviction.
Appellant was convicted of robbery with a weapon and sentenced as both a prison releasee reoffender and an habitual felony offender. He appealed the s…
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 Prison Releasee Reoffender Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of a sentence imposed following his conviction of robbery with a weapon. We affirm.
First, appellant claims that sentencing him as both a prison releasee reoffender and an habitual felony offender for the same offense violated the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. We recently rejected this argument in Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), but certified conflict with Adams v. State, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Second, appellant claims that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act, codified as section 775.082(8), Florida Statutes (1997), violates the separation of powers clause of the Florida Constitution. We rejected this claim in Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA) (certifying a question of great public importance), review granted, 740 So. 2d 529 (Fla.1999).
Third, appellant claims that application of the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act to him constitutes an ex post facto violation, even though he committed his current offense after the effective date of the Act. We rejected this argument in Chambers v. State, 752 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
Fourth, appellant claims that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act violates the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions. We rejected this argument in Woods, Chambers and Turner v. State, 745 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), review granted, No. 96,631, — So. 2d - (Fla. Feb. 3, 2000).
Finally, appellant claims that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act is unconstitutionally vague. We rejected this argument in Woods, Chambers and Turner. For the reasons set forth in the cases cited above, appellant’s sentence is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
MINER, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ„ CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chambers v. State, 764 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…om multiple punishment to sentence him as both an habitual violent felony offender and a prison releasee reoffender in Count One. We found a similar argument to be meritless in Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), and Taylor v. State, 755 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Accord McDaniel v. State, 751 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Grant v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. [*659] 2d DCA 1999). However, as in Wright v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly D992, — So. 2d —, 2000 WL 424058 (Fla. 1st DCA Apr. 20, 200…
-
Johnson v. State, 765 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…ambers v. State, 764 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Nichols v. State, 755 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Palmore v. State, - So. 2d -, 2000 WL 627666 (Fla. 1st DCA May 17, 2000); Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Taylor v. State, 755 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Wright v. State, - So. 2d -, 2000 WL 424053 (Fla. 1st DCA April 20, 2000); Brinson v. State, 751 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Jones v. State, 751 So. 2d 139 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Newsome v. State, - So. 2d -, 2000 WL 256153 (Fl…
-
Taylor v. State, 788 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 2001)…LEWIS, J. We have for review Taylor v. State, 755 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. The petitioner challenges his sentencing under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act (the “Act”) on several grounds, all of which have been addressed by this Court. See Gra…
Authorities Cited
- Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Pollock v. Couffer, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Mundy v. State, 745 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Verro Chambers v. State, 752 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)