LEE WILSON, 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.
Lee Wilson appeals the trial court's summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion seeking resentencing under the 1994 guidelines pursuant to Heggs v. State and additional jail time credit. The appellate court reverses in part regarding one case number and remands for the trial court to provide adequate documentation, while affirming the denial as to the other case number based on newly attached sentencing documents showing Wilson was sentenced as a habitual offender.
As to case 96-16274, Wilson is not entitled to Heggs relief because he was sentenced as a habitual offender, and he was already awarded 220 days of jail time credit, which equals or exceeds his request. As to case 97-6956, the trial court's attachments do not address this claim and the matter is remanded for the trial court to provide record documents demonstrating whether Wilson is entitled to relief.
[1] A trial court must attach record documents conclusively demonstrating a defendant is not entitled to relief when summarily denying a motion for post-conviction relief.
[2] A defendant sentenced as a habitual offender is not entitled to resentencing under prior sentencing guidelines.
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“in Wilson I, we reversed and remanded with directions that if the trial court again denied Heggs relief, it should attach all documents required to support its conclusion that resentencing was unnecessary because Wilson was sentenced as a habitual offender”
Establishes the appellate court's prior mandate requiring the trial court to provide documentary support for its denial of Heggs relief on remand
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilson filed a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion in two consolidated cases (96-16274 and 97-6956) seeking resentencing under the 1994 guidelines and ad…
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 Habitual Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
CASANUEVA, Judge.
Lee Wilson appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for postcon-viction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Wilson alleges that he is entitled to be resentenced under the 1994 guidelines pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000), in case numbers 96-16274 and 97-6956. Wilson also claims that he is entitled to additional jail time credit as to case number 96-16274. We reverse one of Wilson’s claims. The order of the trial court is affirmed in all other respects.
Previously, in Wilson v. State, 783 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (“Wilson I ”)⅞ we reviewed an apparently identical motion from Wilson and an apparently identical order summarily denying relief.. In Wilson I, we reversed and remanded with directions that if the trial court again denied Heggs relief, it should attach all documents required to support its conclusion that resentencing was unnecessary because Wilson was sentenced as a habitual offender. We also reversed the additional jail time credit issue because the trial court failed to address the claim. Id. at 1105. The only difference between the current order and the previous order is the attachment of the judgment and sentencing documents for case number 96-16274 and a new date on the order. Accordingly, it is not clear from the record before this court whether the trial court has complied with our mandate or if the trial court has ruled on a duplicate motion without reference to our mandate.
Wilson’s claim for Heggs relief concerning case number 97-6956 has still not been refuted by the trial court’s attachments because they relate only to case number 96-16274. Accordingly, we again reverse and remand as to this claim. Should the trial court deny this claim, it must attach record documents conclusively demonstrating that Wilson is not entitled to relief. Wilson, 783 So. 2d at 1105.
As to Wilson’s claim for Heggs relief and additional jail credit concerning case number 96-16274, which we previous ly reversed, we now affirm those claims based upon the record attachments provided by the trial court. The trial court attached a copy of the judgment and sentence for case number 96-16274 which showed that Wilson was not entitled to Heggs relief because he was sentenced as a habitual offender. See Johnson v. State, 768 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). The trial court’s attachments further showed that Wilson was awarded 220 days of jail time credit which is an amount equal to or greater than that he requests in his motion.
We affirm Wilson’s remaining claim without comment.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and GREEN, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rico Young v. State, 988 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…any portions of the record, such as the motion for new trial, the trial court’s ruling on the motion, or a transcript of the hearing held on the motion, that might conclusively demonstrate that Young was not entitled to relief. See Wilson v. State, 801 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). A trial court may grant a motion for new trial when the weight of the evidence, though technically sufficient, does not appear to support, the jurors’ verdict. Geibel v. State, 817 So. 2d 1042, 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). A motion…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Johnson v. State, 768 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Wilson v. State, 783 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)