PEYTON HONEYCUTT, 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.
Peyton Honeycutt appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion challenging his sentencing under revised guidelines established in Heggs v. State. The Fourth District reverses, finding Honeycutt's claim timely and remanding for the trial court to determine whether his plea agreement required a minimum-guidelines sentence, potentially allowing resentencing.
The court reverses and holds that Honeycutt's claim is timely because a motion based on Heggs is timely if filed less than two years after the date of that decision. The court remands for further proceedings to determine whether Honeycutt's plea was conditioned on receiving a bottom-of-guidelines sentence, with the state then having the option to agree to resentencing or withdraw from the plea agreement.
[1] A motion for postconviction relief based on Heggs v. …
[2] When a defendant pleads guilty based on a specific sentencing guideline range, and that range is later determined to be incorrect, the state may either agree to resentenc…
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“a motion based on Heggs is timely if filed less than two years after the date of that decision”
Establishes the timeliness standard for Heggs-based sentencing challenges that the Fourth District applies
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHoneycutt committed his offense during the period affected by Heggs v. State. He alleges under oath that he entered into a plea agreement for a specif…
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 Retroactivity Of Judicial Decisions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Peyton E. Honeycutt appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion for postconviction relief from his plea and sentence, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reverse and remand for further proceedings, and certify conflict with the first and fifth district with respect to the timeliness of appellant’s claim. Coppola v. State, 795 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Regan v. State, 787 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Honeycutt committed his offense during the period affected by Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). He alleges under oath that he entered into a plea agreement for a specific term which was a minimum guidelines sentence. Honeycutt alleges that the low end of the guidelines on a proper 1994 scoresheet would be in the range of 68.5 months, instead of the 96 months imposed.
The trial court denied Honeycutt’s motion as untimely finding that it was filed more than two years after appellant’s sentence became final. As outlined by the fifth district in Coppola v. State, 795 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), there is conflict among the districts as to whether Heggs is to be applied retroactively. This court has held that a motion based on Heggs is timely if filed less than two years after the date of that decision. See Jenkins v. State, 771 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see also Murphy v. State, 773 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (en banc). But see Regan v. State, 787 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Coppola, 795 So. 2d at 259.
As Honeycutt’s claim is timely, we remand for further proceedings. Honeycutt alleged that he was sentenced to the bottom of the guidelines in accordance with his plea agreement. No portions of the record were provided to refute appellant’s allegations. If Honeycutt’s plea was conditioned on him receiving a bottom of the guidelines sentence, the state can either agree to the new “bottom of the guidelines” sentence, or withdraw from the plea agreement and take Honeycutt to trial. See Latiif v. State, 787 So. 2d 834 (Fla.2001); Latalian v. State, 786 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Buckingham v. State, 771 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
STONE, FARMER and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gregory Banks v. State, 887 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2004)…Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (certifying conflict with Booker); Gonzalez v. State, 826 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (certifying conflict with Booker); Carvello v. State, 824 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (certifying conflict with Regan); Honeycutt v. State, 805 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (certifying conflict with Regan); Murphy v. State, 773 So. 2d 1174, 1175 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (en banc) (certifying conflict with Booker). Moreover, it is apparent from the First District’s decision in Booker that the First Distri…1 / 2
-
COX v. State of Florida/Appellee, 805 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…eld that defendants should have two years from the issuance of the supreme court’s opinion in Heggs in which to raise it in a rule 3.850 motion, as the facts on which the claim is predicated could not have been known earlier. See Honeycutt v. State, 805 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Jenkins v. State, 771 So. 2d 37, 38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Accord Murphy v. State, 773 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). See also Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b)(1) (exception to two-year time limitation where “the facts on which the claim…
-
Carvello v. State, 824 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…Carvello, the sentence imposed is not a downward departure under the relevant 1994 guidelines and, thus, his pleas have been rendered involuntary following Heggs. This is a facially sufficient claim for postconviction relief. See Honeycutt v. State, 805 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Enchautequi v. State, 782 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). With respect to timeliness of the motion, this court has held that defendants have two years from the issuance of the Heggs opinion in which to raise a claim in a 3.850…
Previewing 3 of 6 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)
- Pagliaro v. Penske Auto Ctrs., Inc., 773 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Regan v. State, 787 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Salim Kamau Latiif v. State, 787 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 2001)
- Jenkins v. State, 771 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Coppola v. State, 795 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Buckingham v. State, 771 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Latalian v. State, 786 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)