JOSEPH ROBINSON, 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.
The trial court's habitual felony offender sentence was vacated because the State failed to establish the requisite sequential convictions required by Florida Statutes § 775.084(3)(a)4, and the case was remanded for resentencing with proper factual findings.
A habitual felony offender sentence must be supported by sufficient factual findings establishing the requisite sequential convictions as required by Florida Statutes § 775.084(3)(a)4.
[1] A habitual felony offender sentence requires the trial court to make specific findings of fact establishing the requisite sequential convictions as required by statute, a…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was sentenced as a habitual felony offender, but the State failed to establish sufficient factual predicate during the sentencing hearing to…
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 Sequential Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant argues, in this direct criminal appeal, the trial judge erred in sentencing him under the Habitual Felony Offender statute. Appellant argues that the State failed to establish a sufficient factual predicate during the sentencing hearing to al low the trial judge to make specific findings as to the basis for habitual felony offender sentencing as required by Section 775.084(3)(a)4., Florida Statutes (1999). Appellant preserved this issue for appeal by filing a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). The State concedes the record evidence did not support a finding that Appellant had the requisite sequential convictions to qualify as a habitual felony offender. Accordingly, the sentence is vacated and this case is remanded to the trial court for the specific purpose of resentencing. On remand, the trial court may once again sentence appellant as a habitual felony offender, provided that the record evidence is legally sufficient to support such a sentence and the trial judge makes sufficient findings of fact to permit appellate review of its decision. Finding no merit in the appellant’s other points on appeal, we affirm the judgment below in all other respects.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.
BROWNING, LEWIS and POLSTON, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ransom Louis Collins, 985 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 2008)…proper predicate felonies as enumerated in section 775.084, Florida Statutes); Walker v. State, 842 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (resentencing ordered where State failed to prove satisfactory evidence of predicate convictions); Robinson v. State, 830 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (resentencing ordered where record evidence did not support a finding that the defendant had requisite sequential convictions to qualify as HFO); Suarez v. State, 808 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (resentencing ordered where pri…