PAUL PHILLIP FOX, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 quashed the First District Court of Appeal's decision and remanded for resentencing after determining that chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida was unconstitutional under the single subject rule. Fox's sentence imposed under this invalid statute must be vacated and reimposed under the valid laws in effect on the date of his offense.
Chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida is unconstitutional as violative of the single subject rule. Fox's conviction is quashed and the case is remanded for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect on May 15, 1997, the date of his offenses.
[1] A statute violating the single subject rule is unconstitutional.
[2] A defendant may challenge an unconstitutional statute on single subject rule grounds even if the challenge was not raised in the trial court.
Previewing 2 of 4 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 hold unconstitutional chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, as violative of the single subject rule”
Establishes the central holding that the statute under which Fox was sentenced is invalid.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFox committed underlying offenses on May 15, 1997. He was sentenced under chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida. The First District Court of Appeal certifie…
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 Non-Deadly Force cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Fox v. State, 743 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the Second District Court of Appeal’s decision in Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), 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 quash the decision below and remand this cause for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect on May 15, 1997, the date on which Fox committed the underlying offenses 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 Fox has standing to challenge chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, on single subject rule grounds. Further, even though Fox 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 decline to address the additional issue raised by Fox — which is clearly outside the scope of the certified conflict issue — concerning the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the justifiable use of non-deadly force.
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)
- FOX v. State, 743 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)