JONATHAN SIMMONS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 defendant is entitled to be resentenced under the guidelines on count twelve, and the habitual violent felony offender adjudication on that count must be vacated.
The trial court vacated a mandatory minimum sentence on one count of a habitual offender sentence, but otherwise left the sentence intact. The defenda…
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 Life Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In response to a postconviction motion filed by Jonathan Simmons, the trial court agreed that under the version of the habitual offender statute in effect at the time of appellant’s crimes,1 it was not permissible to give a sentence as a habitual violent felony offender on count twelve, second degree murder with a firearm, which is a life felony. See Lamont v. State, 610 So. 2d 435, 438 (Fla.1992). The trial court vacated the fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence on count twelve, but made no other change in the sentence.
On this appeal, defendant-appellant Simmons points out that he is entitled to be resentenced under the guidelines on count twelve. Defendant is correct. See id. Accordingly we reverse the trial court order in part and remand with directions to resentence the defendant on count twelve only, in accordance with the guidelines. The habitual violent felony offender adjudication on count twelve must also be vacated.
Defendant need not be present at the resentencing, and we reject the defendant’s argument that he is entitled to be present. In view of defendant’s other life sentences, this amounts to a technical correction on count twelve only.
We affirm the striking of the mandatory minimum sentence on count twelve, but reverse for the other relief just stated.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for correction of sentence.
. December 15, 1988.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Valentin v. State, 963 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…nal episode. We agree and remand for resentencing in accordance with this opinion. Because this corrected sentence has no impact on the term of Johnson’s incarceration, he need not be present at resen-tencing.”) (citation omitted); Simmons v. State, 758 So. 2d 1270, 1270 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (“Defendant need not be present at the resentencing, and we reject the defendant’s argument that he is entitled to be present. In view of defendant’s other life sentences, this amounts to a technical correction on count twel…
-
Safeco Ins. Co. OF Ill. v. Beare, 152 So. 3d 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…aim in state court and losing its right of removal to federal court if the bad faith claim is not severed and dismissed from this suit. It claims that the court departed from the essential requirements of law because Vest v. Travelers Insurance Co., 758 So. 2d 1270, 1276 (Fla.2000), holds that a first party bad faith claim filed prior to determination of liability and damages under the contract between the insurer and insured is not ripe and should be dismissed as premature. In Williams v. Oken, 62 So. 3d 112…
-
Adams v. State, 831 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…e first degree murder charge was first degree murder with a firearm. He reasons that the reduced charge must have been second degree murder with a firearm, a life felony. See Thomas v. State, 822 So. 2d 561, 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Simmons v. State, 758 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). For the defendant’s crime date of March 31, 1996, habitualization was not permissible for a life felony. See Salters v. State, 758 So. 2d 667 (Fla.2000); Lamont v. State, 610 So. 2d 435 (Fla.1992); Martin v. State, 795 So. 2d 143…
Authorities Cited
- Lamont v. State, 610 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 1992)