DAVID E. MCKNIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
David E. McKnight appeals an order denying postconviction relief, contending that he is entitled to be resentenced under Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000).
In Miami-Dade County Circuit Court case number 96-1116, appellant entered into a plea bargain for a habitual offender sentence. Such sentences are not subject to the sentencing guidelines, see § 775.084(4)(g), Florida Statutes (1995), and the habitual offender sentence is not affected by Heggs. The non-habitual sentences imposed in circuit court case numbers 96^128 and 96-4316 were agreed to as part of the plea bargain and were not conditioned upon the sentencing guidelines. They are likewise unaffected by Heggs. See Dunenas v. Moore, 762 So. 2d 1007, 1008 (Fla. 3d DCA2000).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
FAY v. Craig, 99 So. 3d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…e that the “opportunity” to supplement the record afforded by rule 9.200(f)(2) is waived or deemed satisfied when a litigant fails to promptly seek to supplement the record after notice is given of a perceived deficiency. See, e.g., Moment v. State, 773 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (stating appellant waived right to supplement record by failing to seek to supplement after deficiency pointed out in answer brief); Cirillo v. Davis, 732 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (same); Kauffmann v. Baker, 392 So. 2d 13 (…
-
Levon Wilson v. State, 830 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…y of the information, the state is required to provide corroborating evidence establishing both the historical fact of the predicate convictions and the identity of the appellant as the person named in those judgments of conviction. Moment v. State, 773 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Brown v. State, 701 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Therefore, the state’s failure to provide authenticated fingerprint analysis to prove that the person named in the certified convictions was Wilson is reversible error. Upon…
-
Horn v. State, 775 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…correct calculation in his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. We need not address that claim because defendant was sentenced as a habitual offender and the guidelines scoresheet is irrelevant. See § 775.084(4)(g), Fla.Stat. (1995); McKnight v. State, 773 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Defendant argues that his ten-year sentences exceed the legal maximum, but that is not so. Ten years is the legal maximum for a habitualized third degree felony. § 775.084(4)(a)3., Fla.Stat. (1995). Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 10 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)
- Durwin D. Dunenas v. Moore, 762 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)