LEMUEL E. ISAAC, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
LEMUEL E. ISAAC, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
826 So. 2d 396
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2002)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The trial court’s denial of the appellant’s motion to correct sentencing error under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(l) is AFFIRMED. The rule of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), does not apply when the sentence does not exceed the statutory maximum permitted by section 775.082, Florida Statutes. See Lee v. State, 808 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); McCloud v. State, 803 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Caraballo v. State, 805 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Gilson v. State 795 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).
BARFIELD, WEBSTER, and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Galindez v. State, 955 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 2007)…was vacated, and he was resentenced. During the pendency of his appeal from resentenc-ing, he filed motions under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and 3.800(b) raising claims of Apprendi error. See Isaac, 911 So. 2d at 814; Isaac v. State, 826 So. 2d 396, 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). In considering the circuit court’s denial of Isaac’s 3.850 motion, the First District stated that the “heart” of Isaac’s claim was that, by making the factual determination of an escalating pattern of criminal activity [*52…
-
Lemuel E. Isaac v. State, 911 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…-ing. In response to a rule 3.800(a) motion, the trial court resentenced the appellant under the 1994 guidelines to a departure sentence, and this Court affirmed his sentences on July 23, 2002; mandate issued on October 10, 2002. See Isaac v. State, 826 So. 2d 396, 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). While his appeal of the resentencing was pending in this Court, the appellant filed his initial rule 3.850 motion on November 9, 2000. On July 23, 2002, this Court affirmed the appellant’s resentencing, and he filed an amen…
-
State v. Fleming, 61 So. 3d 399 (Fla. 2011)…ed by the statute for the specific crime. See Hall v. State, 823 So. 2d 757, 764 (Fla.2002) (“Because the sentence [*403] for each of Hall’s offenses did not exceed the statutory maximum, we conclude that Apprendi is inapplicable.”); Isaac v. State, 826 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (“The rule of [Apprendi ] ... does not apply when the sentence does not exceed the statutory maximum permitted by section 775.082, Florida Statutes.”). Four years after Apprendi, the Supreme Court in Blakely addressed the applic…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000)
- Caraballo v. State, 805 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- McCLOUD v. State, 803 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Sharife v. Moore, 795 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Gilson v. State, 795 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Jontal Ramon LEE v. State, 808 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)