RASHAN N. JONES, 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 Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's summary denial of a Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief motion, finding that the trial court failed to comply with procedural requirements for denying such motions and that the appellant may have had standing to challenge his sentence under Heggs v. State.
The trial court's summary denial was reversed because it failed to attach required portions of the record showing Jones was not entitled to relief. Jones appears to fall within the class of persons with standing to raise a Heggs challenge based on the offense date, and the trial court must determine in the first instance whether Jones is precluded from relief because his negotiated plea sentence falls within the 1994 guidelines or whether his plea was involuntarily induced by reference to illegal guidelines.
[1] A trial court must attach portions of the files and records to a rule 3.850 motion denial when the denial is not based on the legal insufficiency of the motion.
[2] A double jeopardy claim may arise when a defendant is convicted and sentenced for both robbery with a firearm and aggravated assault relating to the use of the same firea…
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“When the denial of a rule 3.850 motion is not based on the legal insufficiency of the motion, the trial court must attach the portions of the files and records showing conclusively that the-mov-ant is not entitled to relief.”
Establishes the procedural requirement the trial court failed to follow when denying Jones's post-conviction motion.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRashan Jones was convicted and sentenced for robbery with a firearm and aggravated assault involving the same firearm arising from a single crime. Jon…
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 Single Subject Rule (Fla. Const. Art. Iii, § 6) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the trial court’s summary denial, without record attachments, of Appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The first ground raised a double jeopardy argument.
Appellant contended he was erroneously convicted and sentenced for both robbery with a firearm and aggravated assault relating to the use of the same firearm, both acts arising from a single crime. In denying this ground, the trial court made reference to the charging document and explained that there were two different victims for the two different offenses; however, the trial court did not attach a copy of the charging document to the order of denial. When the denial of a rule 3.850 motion is not based on the legal insufficiency of the motion, the trial court must attach the portions of the files and records showing conclusively that the-mov-ant is not entitled to relief. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(d); Debose v. State, 580 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).
In his second ground, Appellant contended he was illegally sentenced pursuant to the 1995 sentencing guidelines for an offense committed on May 23, 1997. See Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000), (holding that chapter 95-184, enacting the 1995 sentencing guidelines, violated the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution).
The trial court denied the motion based on Salters v. State, 731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (determining who has standing to challenge a violent career criminal sentence, enacted by chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, on the basis of violation of the single subject requirement), quashed, 758 So. 2d 667 (Fla.2000), which this court applied to challenges under Heggs in Bortel v. State, 743 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), abrogated by Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla.2000).
In view of the supreme court’s decision in Trapp (holding that those persons with standing to challenge their sentences under Heggs were those whose offenses were committed on or after October 1, 1996, and before May 24, 1997), a copy of which the state has supplied as supplemental authority, it appears that Appellant falls within the class of those persons with standing to raise the challenge. Whether, as the state contends, Appellant is precluded from relief under Heggs because the sentence Appellant received pursuant to his negotiated plea is within the 1994 sentencing guidelines, or whether Appellant’s plea was involuntarily induced by reference to the illegal guidelines, is an issue for the trial court to determine in the first instance.
Accordingly, the order denying Appellant’s motion is reversed and remanded either for an evidentiary hearing or the attachment of portions of the record that conclusively show that the Appellant is entitled to no relief.
WARNER, C.J., GUNTHER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000)
- Salters v. State, 758 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2000)
- Bortel v. State, 743 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Salters v. State, 731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Vining v. Segal, 731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- DeVITTO v. State, 580 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Ozell Debose, Jr. v. State, 580 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)