PAUL E. HEMMY, 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 court held that the State presented insufficient evidence to support habitual felony offender sentencing because it failed to establish the requisite prior convictions and Mr. Hemmy's identity as the subject of those convictions.
Paul E. Hemmy was sentenced to ten years in prison as a habitual offender for a burglary conviction. His counsel declined to stipulate to habitual off…
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 Predicate Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Chief Judge.
Paul E. Hemmy appeals his habitual felony offender sentence. He asserts that there was insufficient evidence presented to support habitual felony offender sentencing. We agree and, accordingly, reverse and remand for resentencing.
Mr. Hemmy was sentenced on a burglary of a dwelling conviction to ten years in prison as a habitual offender. At sentencing, Mr. Hemmy’s counsel declined to stipulate that Mr. Hemmy qualified for habitual offender sentencing. Mr. Hem-my contends that the State then failed to establish both the requisite prior convictions and that he was the subject of those convictions. “The state must establish by affirmative evidence the identity of the accused as the person previously convicted of the predicate crimes.” Louis v. State, 647 So. 2d 324, 325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Additionally, as to an out-of-state conviction, the State must establish that it is “substantially similar in elements and penalties to an offense in this state.” § 775.084(1)(e), Fla. Stat. (1999). We have reviewed the record and agree that the State failed in both regards.
Accordingly, we reverse the habitual offender sentence and remand for a new sentencing hearing. Upon resentencing, Mr. Hemmy may again be sentenced as a habitual felony offender if the State can establish both the predicate convictions and the identity of Mr. Hemmy as the person named in those judgments of conviction.
Reversed for a new sentencing hearing.
GREEN and DAYIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ransom Louis Collins, 985 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 2008)…defendant qualified for enhanced sentencing under section 775.084, Florida Statutes); Boyd v. State, 776 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (resentencing ordered where State’s evidence was insufficient to establish release [*1000] date); Hemmy v. State, 835 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (resentencing ordered where State failed to establish by affirmative evidence the identity of the accused as the person previously convicted of the predicate crimes); Alix v. State, 799 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (resentencing…
-
Miller v. State, 932 So. 2d 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…minimum mandatory term authorized under section 775.084(4)(b)2, Florida Statutes (Supp.1996). Therefore, we reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court to correct this sentence to reflect a 10-year minimum mandatory. See Ruffin v. State, 835 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2002) (remanding to the trial court to correct a sentence for second-degree felony as a habitual violent felony offender to reflect a 10-year minimum mandatory). The trial court’s order is otherwise affirmed. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVE…
-
Bailey v. State, 877 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…lly receive a fifteen-year mandatory minimum for the attempted robbery with a firearm, a second degree felony,2 but could receive at most a ten-year mandatory minimum. This claim is correct. See § 775.084(4)(b)2., Fla. Stat. (1993); Ruffin v. State, 835 So. 2d 272, 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). We therefore reverse the trial court’s summary denial of the motion to this extent only, and remand either for correction of the mandatory minimum sentence in count II or for the attachment of portions of the record that ref…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Louis v. State, 647 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)