MARILYN HOLMES HERNDON, 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.
Marilyn Holmes Herndon challenged her seven-year mandatory minimum sentence for drug trafficking as illegal under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), arguing it was imposed under an unconstitutional statute. The Second District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's dismissal of her motion and remanded for resentencing under the pre-2002 statute.
A claim that a mandatory minimum sentence was illegally imposed is cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion where the error is apparent on the face of the record. Herndon presented a facially sufficient claim because she committed the offense within the Taylor window when the sentencing statute was unconstitutional. The trial court must resentence her under the 1997 version of the statute if the seven-year mandatory minimum was indeed imposed for the offense committed during that period.
[1] A claim that a mandatory minimum sentence was illegally imposed is cognizable in a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) if the error is ap…
[2] Chapter 99-188, Laws of Florida, which provided for mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain drug offenses, was declared unconstitutional for violating the single s…
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“A claim that a mandatory minimum sentence was illegally imposed is cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion where the error is apparent on the face of the record.”
Establishes the legal standard for when sentencing challenges are reviewable under Rule 3.800(a).
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHerndon pleaded to trafficking in methamphetamine and received a seven-year mandatory minimum sentence. The offense occurred during the 'Taylor window…
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 Single Subject Rule (Fla. Const. Art. Iii, § 6) cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1027] CASANUEVA, Judge.
Marilyn Holmes Herndon challenges the trial court’s order dismissing her motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings.
In her motion, Herndon alleged that she pleaded to trafficking in methamphetamine. She further alleged that the seven-year mandatory minimum term of imprisonment imposed by the trial court is illegal based on our opinion in Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 821 So. 2d 302 (Fla.2002). A claim that a mandatory minimum sentence was illegally imposed is cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion where the error is apparent on the face of the record. See Sims v. State, 838 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Leath v. State, 805 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
Taylor held that chapter 99-188, Laws of Florida, which provided for the imposition of mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain drug offenses, is unconstitutional because it violates the single subject rule of the Florida Constitution. In 2002, the legislature enacted chapters 02-208, 02-209, 02-210, 02-211 and 02-212, Laws of Florida, which reenacted the provisions originally contained in chapter 99-188. The legislature intended that the reenactment be retroactive to July 1, 1999. See Green v. State, 839 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). However, in Green, this court held that the reenactment of the sentencing provisions of chapter 99-188 cannot be applied retroactively because this would violate the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the United States and Florida Constitutions.
Herndon alleged that she committed the offense of trafficking in methamphetamine within the Taylor window. See Green, 839 So. 2d at 750 n. 1. She has therefore presented a facially sufficient claim. See Sims, 838 So. 2d 658. The trial court dismissed Herndon’s motion without prejudice to Herndon’s refiling it following review of Taylor in the Florida Supreme Court. However, on May 29, 2002, prior to the issuance of the trial court’s order, the State filed a voluntary dismissal of its petition for review. See State v. Taylor, 821 So. 2d 302 (Fla.2002) (table). We therefore reverse the order of the trial court and remand for further consideration of Herndon’s claim. If Herndon is correct that the trial court imposed a seven-year mandatory minimum for trafficking in methamphetamine where the offense was committed within the Taylor window, the trial court shall resentence her under the 1997 version of the statute. See Green, 839 So. 2d 748. We certify conflict with the Fourth and Fifth District cases with which we disagreed in Green.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
NORTHCUTT and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sellers v. State, 851 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…(Fla. 2d DCA 2003). AFFIRMED. SAWAYA, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur. . § 893.135(l)(b)l.a., Fla. Stat. (2000). . Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. dismissed, 821 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 2002), superseded by statute, Herndon v. State, 842 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).…
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Green v. State, 839 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Leath v. State, 805 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Orosco v. State, 838 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Edrick Lee Hines v. State, 838 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)