SAMUEL RICHARDSON, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (21 total)

• Hughes v. State, 901 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 2005)
  …ormation nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, the only remaining question is whether the rule in Apprendi applies retroactively to the appellant’s sentence, which became final prior to the date Apprendi was decided. Hughes v. State, 826 So. 2d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Relying on its determination that Apprendi had the effect of overruling Mays, the First District certified the question of retroactivity of Apprendi to this Court. See id. at 1075. The First District’s holding that Ap-pre…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Edilberto Barrios-Cruz v. State, 63 So. 3d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
  …he past. C. Effect of Retroactive Application on the Administration of Justice In discussing Apprendi, the First District theorized that the impact of retroactive application on the administration of justice “would be monumental.” Hughes v. State, 826 So. 2d 1070, 1074 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). As stated above, Padilla likely has fewer far-reaching implications than Apprendi. However, Padilla does carry with it the potential for the same sort of complications. Of paramount concern is the likelihood that courts wo…
• Lemuel E. Isaac v. State, 911 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
  …y, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Although it may not seem so at first, the court’s analysis in the present ease gives Apprendi retroactive application. The court acknowledges this court’s correct decision in Hughes v. State, 826 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), aff'd, 901 So. 2d 837 (Fla.2005), but dismisses the issue of retro-activity stating that, because Apprendi “was decided prior to appellant’s resen-tencing, the trial court was bound by its holding.” Op. at 814. Unless Hughes is…

  ← 1 / 2 →

Authorities Cited

• Johnson v. State, 776 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
• Lopez v. State, 688 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)