NATHANIEL A. BENJAMIN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 held that the defendant was improperly designated an Habitual Violent Felony Offender because his current offenses and prior qualifying felony did not meet statutory requirements. The court affirmed the convictions but remanded for resentencing.
Nathaniel Benjamin pleaded guilty and was adjudicated an habitual violent felony offender (HVFO). However, neither his current offenses nor his sole p…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Nathaniel A. Benjamin appeals from the lower court’s denial of post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm Benjamin’s convictions but remand for resentencing.
Benjamin was charged with burglary of an unoccupied structure, petit theft, and criminal mischief. Benjamin pleaded guilty and was adjudicated an habitual violent felony offender (HVFO). However, as Benjamin asserts and as the State concedes, none of the crimes for which Benjamin presently serves his sentence are of the enumerated felonies which qualify him for HVFO designation pursuant to Florida Statute 775.084 (1997). In addition, the only prior felony committed by Benjamin that would qualify him as a violent offender under the statute was committed well beyond the time frame for consideration as an HVFO predicate offense.
Although it appears from the record that Benjamin raised the HVFO issue in a 1999 motion for corrected sentence, and the trial court granted that specific relief, the record also indicates that Benjamin’s HVFO sentencing designation currently remains unchanged. Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to vacate Benjamin’s current sentencing designation as an Habitual Violent Felony Offender and re-sentence him as an Habitual Offender, as previously announced by the trial court. We affirm all remaining issues.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ransom Louis Collins, 985 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 2008)…sequential convictions to qualify as HFO); Suarez v. State, 808 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (resentencing ordered where prior case relied on by State did not qualify as prior conviction under section 775.084, Florida Statutes); Benjamin v. State, 814 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (resentencing ordered because HVFO sentencing should not have been imposed where none of defendant’s current crimes were enumerated as qualifying offenses in section 775.084, Florida Statutes); Gordon v. Moore, 832 So. 2d 880 (Fla…
-
Malloy v. Gunster, Yoakley, Valdes-Fauli & Stewart, P.A., 850 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…G.B.V. Int’l, Ltd., 787 So. 2d 838, 842 (Fla.2001) (footnote omitted). In order for the writ to issue, the petitioner must establish that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law. Kash N’ Karry Food Stores, Inc. v. Smart, 814 So. 2d 530, 532 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Parkway Bank v. Fort Myers Armature Works, Inc., 658-So. 2d 646, 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). [T]he departure from the essential requirements of the law necessary for the issuance of a writ of certiorari is something more than a…
-
Martin v. Hacsi, 909 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…not filing a timely motion to substitute. Martin, however, did not even inquire within the 90 days as to whether a personal representative had been appointed. Inactivity is not excusable neglect. See, e.g., Kash N’ Karry Food Stores, Inc. v. Smart, 814 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). AFFIRMED. PLEUS, C.J., and ORFINGER, J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence