TERRELL BUSH, 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.
Terrell Bush appeals the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, arguing that a prior appellate decision rendered the three-year mandatory minimum sentence unconstitutional. The court affirms, holding that even if the prior decision applies, the mandatory minimum existed prior to the allegedly unconstitutional legislation and thus remains valid.
The sentence is legal because the three-year minimum mandatory sentence for use of a firearm during aggravated battery existed prior to the allegedly unconstitutional legislation, and this prior valid enactment controls sentencing even if the later statute is unconstitutional.
[1] A sentence is not illegal if it is based on statutory provisions that were validly enacted and in effect at the time of the offense, even if subsequent legislation affect…
[2] A defendant's sentence is legal if it is based on statutory provisions that existed prior to the enactment of legislation later found to be unconstitutional.
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“Assuming Taylor applies in this case, that decision announced that the validly enacted statutes in effect at the time of the offense would control sentencing.”
Establishes the court's holding that even if the prior unconstitutionality ruling applies, valid prior statutes still control sentencing.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn October 24, 1998, Terrell Bush shot and wounded another man. He was charged with attempted first-degree murder but entered a nolo contendere plea t…
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 Retroactive Legislation cases and more on FLexlaw
ALTENBERND, Judge.
Terrell Bush appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence. We affirm albeit for reasons other than those contained in the trial court’s order. Mr. Bush shot and wounded another man on October 24,1998. He was charged with attempted first-degree murder. He ultimately entered a plea of nolo contende-re to the offense of aggravated battery with a firearm. The trial court sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment with a three-year minimum mandatory term of imprisonment pursuant to section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (1999). Mr. Bush filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). He argued that his sentence was illegal because it included the three-year minimum mandatory. He believes that this court’s opinion in Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), rendered áll of chapter 775 unconstitutional and specifically rendered section 775.087(2) unconstitutional. Taylor held that chapter 99-188, Laws of Florida, was unconstitutionally enacted in violation of the single-subject rule.
The trial court denied Mr. Bush’s motion on the ground that, during the 2002 legislative session, the legislature had reenacted the provisions affected by Taylor. The legislature expressly made the new statutes retroactive to a period including the date of Mr. Bush’s offense. Thus, the trial court relied on the new statutes to render Mr. Bush’s sentence legal. Mr. Bush maintains that the legislature had no power to enact such legislation on a retroactive basis.
We do not need to decide how recent legislation may affect our decision in Taylor or even whether Taylor rendered section 775.087(2) unconstitutional. Assuming Taylor applies in this case, that decision announced that the validly enacted statutes in effect at the time of the .offense would control sentencing. The three-year minimum mandatory sentence for use of a firearm during the commission of aggravated battery existed prior to chapter 99-188. Mr. Bush’s sentence is legal even if section 775.087(2) is the controlling statute.
Affirmed.
WHATLEY and NORTHCUTT, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sigafoos v. State, 825 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…that remained on the books even after this court’s decision in Taylor. There is no need to apply the 2002 legislative enactments retroactively if the valid laws at the time of these offenses permitted habitual offender sentencing. See Bush v. State, 823 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Affirmed. PARKER and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.…
-
Miller v. State, 848 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…s claim that the $100,000 fine was illegally imposed because the imposition of the fine was mandatory pursuant to section 893.135(l)(c)(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), which was in existence prior to the passage of chapter 99-188. See Bush v. State, 823 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (holding that the validly enacted statutes in effect prior to the enactment of chapter 99-188 control sentencing). In ground three, Miller also alleged that the fine was illegal because it was not part of the plea bargain. Miller…
-
Lindsey v. State, 839 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…e was affected by the amendments to the Act and that he could not have been sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender pursuant to the statute in existence prior to the passage of chapter 99-188, his claim is facially insufficient. See Bush v. State, 823 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (holding that the validly enacted statutes in effect prior to the enactment of chapter 99-188 control sentencing). Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial court. ALTENBERND and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur. . Ch. 97-239, La…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)