BASILIO BLANCO, 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 reversed the denial of Blanco's motion to correct an illegal sentence, holding that the 1995 sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional and remanding for resentencing under valid guidelines.
The 1995 sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional, and a defendant sentenced under them must be resentenced under the valid guidelines in effect when the offense was committed.
[1] A defendant sentenced under an unconstitutional version of the sentencing guidelines must be resentenced under the valid guidelines in effect at the time the offense was…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBlanco was sentenced on August 15, 1997, on an information filed in 1996, under the 1995 sentencing guidelines.…
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 Heggs Window cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Basilio Blanco, Jr., a/k/a Ramon Vinolio appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), alleging that he was sentenced under an unconstitutional version of the 1995 sentencing guidelines. Blanco was Sentenced on August 15, 1997, on an information filed in 1996. The circuit court denied Blanco’s motion, declining to find that the 1995 sentencing guidelines were unconstitutional. The Florida Supreme Court recently held to the contrary. See Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the circuit court to determine whether Blanco in fact committed his offense within the Heggs window and, if so, whether his sentence could not have been imposed under the 1994 guidelines without a departure. If the answers to both of these questions are affirmative, then Blanco must be resentenced in accordance with the valid guidelines in existence at the time he committed his offenses. If the court enters an order declaring resentencing unnecessary, it should attach all documents necessary to reach that conclusion. See Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
PARKER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and NORTHCUTT, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Worlen Guy Knighten v. State, 782 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…allowable under the 1994 guidelines. On remand, the trial court shall determine whether Knighten’s sentence was in excess of the 1994 sentencing guidelines maximum. If so, Knighten must be resen-tenced under the 1994 guidelines. See Blanco v. State, 765 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). If the trial court determines that resentencing is unnecessary, it shall attach to its order those portions of the record it relied on in reaching this conclusion. Id. The order of the trial court is affirmed in all other respect…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)