LAWRENCE P. GRAFF, 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.
Lawrence Graff was sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender for crimes committed while escaped from a state correctional facility. The court reversed, holding that an escaped prisoner is not "released" within the meaning of the sentencing statute, which contemplates state-initiated release rather than self-release by escape.
An escaped prisoner cannot be sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender because the statute contemplates release initiated by the State, not a "self-release" due to escape. The term "released" in section 775.082(8)(a) does not encompass situations where a prisoner escapes confinement.
[1] A defendant who escapes from a state correctional facility and commits offenses while at large is not considered "released" from a state correctional facility for the pur…
[2] The term "released" in the context of prison releasee reoffender sentencing contemplates a release initiated by the state, not a "self-release" resulting from a prisoner'…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Graff argues that since he escaped from his confinement, he could not be considered released for purposes of sentencing under section 775.082(8)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). We agree.”
The court agrees with the defendant's core argument that escape precludes "releasee" status under the sentencing statute.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn November 6, 1998, Graff was confined at the Tampa Work Release Center. On December 4, 1998, Graff escaped from the facility and committed strong-ar…
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 Prison Releasee Reoffender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
STRINGER, Judge.
Lawrence Graff challenges his prisoner releasee reoffender sentence for strong-arm robbery and aggravated battery. We reverse because Graff was not “released” from a state correctional facility at the time he committed his offenses.
On November 6, 1998, Graff was confined at the Tampa Work Release Center, a state correctional facility. On December 4, 1998, Graff escaped from the facility and while at large, committed the offenses in this case. Graff' was later captured and charged with strong-arm robbery and aggravated battery. Graff pleaded guilty to the offenses, and the trial court sentenced him as a prison releasee reoffender. Graff argues that since he escaped from his confinement, he could not be considered released for purposes of sentencing under section 775.082(8)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). We agree.
This issue has already been decided by this court in Thomas v. State, 741 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). In Thomas, the defendant escaped from the St. Petersburg Community Correctional Center. Id. at 1246. While at large, Thomas committed a burglary and an attempted burglary. Thomas was convicted of burglary of a dwelling, attempted burglary of a dwelling, and escape. The trial court sentenced him as a prison releasee reoffender. Id:
We reversed Thomas’ sentence and concluded that since Thomas escaped from the state correctional facility, he could not be considered “released” from a state correctional facility for the purpose of sentencing under section 775.082(8)(a). Id. at 1246-47. We rejected the State’s argument that the statute encompassed situations in which the prisoner, in effect, causes a “self-release” by escaping confinement. Id. at 1246. Instead, we concluded that, by the term “released,” the statute contemplated a release initiated by the State and not a “self-release” due to the prisoner’s escape. Id. We note that the trial court did not have the benefit of Thomas at the time it imposed the sentence in this case.
In accordance with Thomas, we reverse the imposition of Graffs prison releasee reoffender sentence and remand for deletion of that portion of his sentence.1
Reversed and remanded for resentencing.
PATTERSON, C.J., and FULMER, J., concur. . We note that the legislature, in 1999, added section 775.082(9)(a)(2), Florida Statutes (1999), to address the situation presented in this case by including in the definition of a "prison releasee reoffender’’ persons who commit one of the enumerated offenses while serving a prison sentence or on escape status from a state correctional facility. Ch. 99-188, § 2, at 1041, Laws of Fla. However, this statutory provision is not applicable in this case because it became effective after the date Graff committed his offenses.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Graff v. State, 846 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ong armed robbery, the aggravated battery, and the escape, all to run concurrently. On June 13, 2001, pursuant to a mandate from this court, the trial court issued an amended sentence, deleting the PRR portion of Graffs sentence. See Graff v. State, 785 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA2001). In his motion, Graff claimed that his plea was not voluntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel. He claimed that his attorney led him to believe that he could receive drug treatment in lieu of a prison sentence, even thoug…
Authorities Cited
- Thomas v. State, 741 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)