GREGORY A. GLOVER, 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 failed to prove an essential requirement for sentencing under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act when it relied solely on hearsay evidence regarding the appellant's release date.
Appellant was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender. The state's evidence regarding his release date was hearsay.…
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 Prison Releasee Reoffender (Prr) Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Gregory A. Glover, appeals his conviction for armed robbery and his sentence of life without parole as a prison releasee reoffender (PRR). Appellant raises six allegations of error. We affirm appellant’s conviction and find merit only in Appellant’s allegation of sentencing error. We reverse and remand for resentencing.
Because the state relied solely on hearsay evidence regarding Appellant’s release date from prison, it failed to prove an essential requirement for sentencing pursuant to the PRR Act. See § 775.082(9), Fla. Stat. (2000); see also Sinclair v. State, 853 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)(holding evidence was legally insufficient to support imposition of sentences under the PRR Act where state relied solely on hearsay evidence regarding defendant’s release date from prison and failed to prove prior convictions were defendant’s); King v. State, 590 So. 2d 1032(Fla. 1st DCA 1991)(holding probation officer’s testimony regarding defendant’s release date based on a Department of Corrections computer printout, was inadmissible hearsay because officer was not the “custodian” of records and had no knowledge regarding the method of preparation or the reliability of the printout).
On remand, the trial court may again sentence Appellant as a PRR if it makes the required findings and the evidence supports those findings. Reversed and remanded for resentencing.
BARFIELD, KAHN and HAWKES, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ives v. State, 993 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…the process used in determining a defendant qualifies for enhanced sentencing, such as the one at issue in this case, can constitute reversible error in a direct appeal. See, e.g., Gray v. State, 910 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Glover v. State, 871 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). On remand for resentencing, however, the state is permitted to produce [*121] further evidence to support the enhanced sentence. This second opportunity to properly qualify the defendant for enhanced sentencing does not violate…
-
Gray v. State, 910 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…a state correctional facility....”). Unless the defendant admits that his crime occurred within three years of his release from prison, proof of the release date is “an essential requirement for sentencing pursuant to the PRR Act.” Glover v. State, 871 So. 2d 1025, 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); see also Sinclair v. State, 853 So. 2d 551, 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (holding competent proof of appellant’s release date from prison “essential to the imposition of [a] PRR sentence[ ]”). The State had the burden of provin…
-
Julian v. Desue, IV, 908 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…ies to sentencing proceedings.”); Engle v. State, 438 So. 2d 803, 814 (Fla.1983) (“If the defendant disputes the truth of a presentence report, he has the right to secure confrontation and cross-examination if he wishes to do so.”); Glover v. State, 871 So. 2d 1025, 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (“Because the state relied solely on hearsay evidence regarding Appellant’s release date from prison, it failed to prove an essential requirement for sentencing pursuant to the PRR Act.”). The particular record in question…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- King v. State, 590 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Sinclair v. State, 853 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)