ALFRED WILLIAM WALKER, 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.
Alfred Walker appealed the denial of his motion for postconviction relief, challenging his sentencing. While the trial court correctly rejected his arguments based on the Heggs constitutional challenge window, the appellate court found the trial court may have erred by applying the 1995 sentencing guidelines to an offense committed in 1994, and remanded for reconsideration.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of relief under the Heggs constitutional challenge, as Walker's offense did not occur within the applicable window period. However, the court held that if Walker was sentenced under the 1995 guidelines for an offense committed in 1994, that constitutes error regardless of Heggs, and remanded for determination of whether the improper guidelines were actually applied.
[1] A defendant is entitled to be resentenced if sentenced under unconstitutional guidelines that do not apply to the date of their offense.
[2] Sentencing guidelines revisions apply only to felonies committed on or after the effective date of the revisions.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“If the trial court sentenced Walker under the 1995 sentencing guidelines, that was error because Walker's offense occurred before the effective date of the 1995 sentencing guidelines.”
Establishes that applying post-offense guidelines violates statutory and constitutional requirements, independent of the Heggs holding
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWalker was convicted of a crime occurring on October 14, 1994. He was sentenced in September 1996 using what appears to be the 1995 sentencing guideli…
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
[*949] PER CURIAM.
Alfred William Walker appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Walker raises four issues concerning his conviction and one issue concerning his sentence. We affirm the denial of relief as to Walker’s conviction without discussion. However, we remand for further proceedings on Walker’s sentence.
Walker contends that even though his offense occurred on October 14, 1994, the trial court used the 1995 sentencing guidelines when it sentenced him in September 1996. Walker argues that he is entitled to be resentenced because the supreme court recently declared the 1995 sentencing guidelines unconstitutional. See Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620, 627 (Fla.2000). The trial court denied Walker relief, noting that Walker’s offense did not occur within the applicable window period for challenging the constitutionality of the guidelines. See Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924, 928 (Fla.2000) (holding that only those defendants whose offenses occurred between October 1, 1995, and May 27, 1997, have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the sentencing guidelines addressed by Heggs). While we agree with the trial court that Walker is not entitled to relief under Heggs, we do not believe that this ends the inquiry.
If the trial court sentenced Walker under the 1995 sentencing guidelines, that was error because Walker’s offense occurred before the effective date of the 1995 sentencing guidelines. See § 921.001(4)(b)2., Fla.Stat. (1995) (stating that any revisions to the 1994 sentencing guidelines apply only to felonies committed on or after the effective date of the revisions); Miller v. Florida, 482 U.S. 423, 435-36, 107 S.Ct. 2446, 96 L.Ed.2d 351 (1987); Allen v. State, 771 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Thus, if Walker was sentenced under the 1995 guidelines, his sentence is improper regardless of Heggs.
Because the trial court found that Walker’s offense did not occur within the Heggs window, it did not attach any documents to its order addressing Walker’s sentence. Therefore, we remand this case to the trial court to determine whether Walker was in fact sentenced under the 1995 sentencing guidelines. If so, the trial court must re-sentence Walker in accordance with the valid guidelines in effect on the date of his offense. If not, the trial court should attach those portions of the record showing conclusively that Walker is not entitled to relief.
Affirmed in part; remanded for further proceedings.
PARKER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reed v. State, 787 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…nce, he would be entitled to separate scoresheets. See State v. White, 762 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Correspondingly, Reed would be entitled to be resentenced on the 1994 offenses pursuant to the 1994 sentencing guidelines. See Walker v. State, 776 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). However, Reed is not entitled to relief because his sentence is the result of a negotiated plea through which Reed was sentenced to ten years in prison on a number of cases originating in three different counties. Because Reed’…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Miller v. Florida, 482 U.S. 423 (U.S. 1987)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000)
- Allen v. State, 771 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)