ROBERT LEE WILLIAMS, 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 held that a defendant may challenge a sentence imposed under unconstitutional sentencing guidelines if the offenses were committed within a specific window period.
Robert Lee Williams was convicted of DUI manslaughter and DUI causing serious bodily injury. He appealed his sentence, arguing it was illegal because …
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 Unconstitutional Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Robert Lee Williams appeals his sentence following his conviction of DUI manslaughter and DUI causing serious bodily injury. Appellant argues that he was subject to an illegal sentence because the trial court utilized the sentencing guidelines enacted by chapter 95-184, Laws of Florida, which has been declared unconstitutional. We remand for further proceedings.
Chapter 95-184-has been held to be unconstitutional as violative of the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. See Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). Appellant may challenge his sentence, because the offenses to which he was sentenced were committed within the window period established by Heggs and Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000).
We remand this case to the trial court for its determination of whether Williams’ sentences could have been imposed under the 1994 guidelines, without an upward departure. If so, Williams is not entitled to resentencing. If, however, appellant’s sentences constitute a departure sentence under the 1994 guidelines, appellant must be resentenced utilizing the 1994 guidelines. See Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
ALLEN, WOLF AND VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holland v. State, 769 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…s, and appellee agrees, that his case falls within the window of unconstitutionality created by Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000), with regard to the 1995 sentencing guidelines. In accordance with this court’s opinion in Williams v. State, 769 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), we remand the case to the trial court for its determination whether Holland’s sentence could have been imposed under the 1994 guidelines without an upward departure, and for such further proceedings as Williams requires. See als…
Authorities 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)