JOSE M. ARCE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Habitual Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Jose M. Arce seeks review of an order that denied his motion to correct his sentence. Arce argued in his motion that the 1995 guidelines used in his sentencing proceedings are unconstitutional. Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). Arce argued further that his offense took place on August' 28, 1996, within the applicable window period for presenting such a challenge. See Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla.2000)(window period to begin on October 1, 1995, and close on May 24, 1997).
We affirm as the trial court properly denied Arce’s motion. Arce was sentenced as a habitual offender to a twenty-year prison term. Compare Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(trial court declined to treat' defendant as a habitual offender but imposed the maximum sentence permitted under the 1995 guidelines). Pursuant to Florida Statute section 775.084(4)(e), .a habitual offender sentence is not subject to the guidelines provisions of section 921.001. Accordingly, the trial court’s denial is proper. AFFIRMED.
KLEIN, SHAHOOD and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Tannihill v. State, 848 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…et contains an error, but argues that any error is irrelevant because appellant was not sentenced according to the scoresheet, but rather, was sentenced as a prison re-leasee reoffender and habitual violent felony offender. See, e.g., Arce v. State, 762 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)(holding that a habitual offender sentence is not subject to the sentencing guidelines; therefore, appellant not entitled to relief pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000)). But for the fact that appellant’s convicti…
-
State v. Gwenda Jean Lemon, 825 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 2002)…s argument that because the departure sentence could have been imposed even if the 1994 guidelines had been used, appellant is not entitled to relief. Although this reasoning has been applied to habitual offender sentences, see, e.g., Arce v. State, 762 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), those sentences do not arise from the guidelines, while departure sentences do. Nonetheless, relief may not be due where it can be shown that the trial court would have imposed the same 1995 guidelines departure sentence under t…
-
Gwenda Jean Lemon v. State, 769 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…’s argument that because the departure sentence could have been imposed even if the 1994 guidelines had been used, appellant is not entitled to relief. Although this reasoning has been applied to habitual offender sentences, see e.g., Arce v. State, 762 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), those sentences do not arise from the guidelines, while departure sentences do. Nonetheless, relief may not be due where it can be shown that the trial court would have imposed the same 1995 guidelines departure sentence under t…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000)
- Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)