STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
HENRY WILLIAMS, 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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed the Second District Court of Appeal's decision invalidating chapter 95-182 as violative of the single subject rule and remanded for resentencing under the valid laws in effect when the crime was committed, following its prior decision in State v. Thompson.
The Court affirmed that chapter 95-182 is unconstitutional as violative of the single subject rule and remanded for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect on November 27, 1996, when Williams committed the underlying offense.
[1] A statute violates the single subject rule of the Florida Constitution if it embraces more than one subject.
[2] A defendant has standing to challenge a statute on single subject rule grounds.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“we held unconstitutional chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, as violative of the single subject rule”
Establishes the constitutional violation and basis for invalidating the sentencing statute
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHenry Williams committed his underlying offense on November 27, 1996. He was sentenced under chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida. The Second District Cour…
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 Article Iii, Section 6 Of The Florida Constitution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Williams v. State, 740 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), in which the Second District Court of Appeal followed its prior decision in Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), in holding that chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, is unconstitutional as violative of the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Based on our decision in State v. Thompson, 750 So. 2d 643 (Fla.1999), in which we held unconstitutional chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, as violative of the single subject rule, we affirm the decision below reversing Williams’ violent career criminal sentence and remand this cause for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect on November 27, 1996, the date on which Williams committed the underlying offense in this case.1 See Thompson, 750 So. 2d at 649 (remanding for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time the defendant committed her offenses).
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur. WELLS, J., dissents.
. Based on our decision in Salters v. State, 758 So. 2d 667 (Fla.2000), we determine that Williams has standing to challenge chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, on single subject rule grounds. Further, even though Williams failed to raise a single subject rule challenge in the trial court, we find that such challenge may be properly addressed in this case for the first time on appeal. Cf. Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620, 623, 624 n. 4 (Fla.2000); Nelson v. State, 748 So. 2d 237, 241-42 (Fla.1999), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 950, 145 L.Ed.2d 825 (2000); State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1, 3-4 (Fla.1993). Finally, we reverse the decision below to the limited extent that it remanded this cause for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time that Williams was sentenced.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- State v. Johnson, 616 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1993)
- State v. Thompson, 750 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1999)
- Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
- Salters v. State, 758 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2000)
- Nelson v. State, 748 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1999)
- Hickey v. State, 740 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)