ROBERT CHANCE, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Eli Enrique Valdes v. State, 970 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
  …ences under both the [Prison Releasee Reoffender] Act and the habitual violent felony offender statute does not violate principles of double jeopardy, but the imposition of equal concurrent sentences here violates the Act itself.”); Martin v. State, 813 So. 2d 1036, 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that the imposition of “equal concurrent sentences of imprisonment under both the Habitual Felony Offender Statute and the Prison Releasefe] Reoffender Act” was error) (citing Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.200…
• Frazier v. State, 877 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
  …t erred in imposing two concurrent, equal sentences in this case, not because such sentencing violated double jeopardy, but because it is not authorized by the Act. Id. at 659; Bloodworth v. State, 790 So. 2d 1032, 1033 (Fla.2001); Martin v. State, 813 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Watts v. State, 789 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Thus, pursuant to Grant, the appellant was properly sentenced for robbery with a firearm, a first degree felony. Under the PRR Act, a first degree felony is punishable by thirty…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Smith v. State, 934 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
  …n-year minimum mandatory as to the second degree felony. As the record clearly reflects, the punishments imposed are not equal under the sentencing schemes relied upon. Affirmed. . See Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000); Martin v. State, 813 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA [*544] 2002) (wherein the State conceded that the imposition of equal concurrent sentences as habitual offender and as a prison releasee reoffender was error); Watts v. State, 789 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).…

Authorities Cited

• Strunk v. State, 728 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
• Curran v. State, 745 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)