ALLEN MATHUUS, 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 affirmed convictions for capital sexual battery and child abuse where the victim's testimony established the charged conduct occurred within the alleged time periods, but remanded for resentencing on three counts because sentences were based on unconstitutional 1995 guidelines.
The state proved sexual batteries occurred within the time periods alleged in the information based on the victim's testimony regarding her age at the time of each offense.
[1] Victim's testimony regarding her age at the time of charged sexual batteries establishes that the conduct occurred within the time periods alleged in the information, and…
[2] Sentences imposed under unconstitutional 1995 sentencing guidelines must be vacated and resentencing conducted under the valid guidelines in effect at the time of the off…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted of multiple counts of capital sexual battery, sexual battery under familial authority, and felony child abuse. The victim test…
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 Victim Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, C.J.
We affirm appellant’s convictions for several counts of capital sexual battery, sexual battery under familial authority, and felony child abuse. Appellant’s contention on appeal is that the state failed to prove that any of the charged sexual batteries to the child victim occurred within the time periods alleged in each count of the information. To the contrary, the victim testified how old she was when the sexual batteries occurred, and the trial court noted that her age in each instance fell within the time frames of the charge. The appellant never sought to narrow the time frames as alleged in the information. Cf. Dell’Orfano v. State, 616 So. 2d 38 (Fla.1993). There was no error. The state concedes, however, that appellant’s sentences on Counts V, VII, and VIII must be reversed for resentencing because those sentences were based on the 1995 sentencing guidelines declared unconstitutional under Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). See also Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla.2000). The sentences on these counts are outside the range permitted by the 1994 guidelines. We thus remand for resentencing based upon the valid laws in effect at the time of the offenses.
Convictions affirmed; remanded for re-sentencing.
FARMER 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)