PETER JOSEPH KLAUER, 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.
Peter Klauer appealed the denial of his postconviction motion challenging his sentence as a habitual felony offender, arguing his federal prior convictions did not constitute qualified offenses under Florida law. The court found the state failed to establish that the federal offenses were substantially similar in elements and penalties to Florida offenses, reversing the conviction and remanding for resentencing.
The court reversed the trial court's denial of postconviction relief, finding the state failed to satisfy its burden of establishing that the federal offenses were substantially similar in elements and penalties to Florida offenses. The court remanded for resentencing, allowing the state the opportunity on remand to present evidence establishing qualifying predicate convictions.
[1] A defendant seeking postconviction relief based on an illegal sentence may assert that out-of-state offenses used for habitual felony offender sentencing were not qualifi…
[2] A "qualified offense" for habitual felony offender sentencing purposes is an out-of-state violation substantially similar in elements and penalties to a Florida offense,…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The State bears the burden of establishing that an out-of-state conviction is substantially similar in elements and penalties to an offense in Florida.”
Establishes the legal standard and burden of proof for qualifying prior convictions under the habitual felony offender statute
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKlauer was convicted and sentenced as a habitual felony offender based in part on prior federal convictions. Klauer filed a postconviction motion (tre…
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 Habitual Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Peter Joseph Klauer, seeks review of the trial court’s denial of his postconviction relief motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Of the multiple issues raised on appeal, we find that only one has merit and otherwise affirm. In his thirty-seventh claim for postconviction relief, which we treat as if it were a rule 3.800(a) claim, appellant asserted that he was illegally sentenced as a habitual felony offender because his federal offenses did not constitute qualified offenses pursuant to section 775.084(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1991).
Pursuant to section 775.084(l)(a) 1., Florida Statutes (1991), a habitual felony offender is a defendant who has previously been convicted of any combination of two or more felonies in Florida or other qualified offenses. A “qualified offense” is defined as:
any offense, substantially similar in elements and penalties to an offense in this state, which is in violation of a law of any other jurisdiction ... that was punishable under the law of such jurisdiction at the time of its commission by the defendant by death or imprisonment exceeding 1 year. § 775.084(l)(c), Fla. Stat. (1991). The State bears the burden of establishing that an out-of-state conviction is substantially similar in elements and penalties to an offense in Florida. Hemmy v. State, 835 So. 2d 272, 272 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
' We find that the record does not establish that the State satisfied its burden in this case. Furthermore, neither the trial court’s order nor the State’s response to this Court’s order to show cause issued pursuant to Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), conclusively refutes appellant’s claim that his federal offenses did not constitute qualified offenses because they are not substantially similar in elements and penalties to Florida offenses. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order as to this claim and remand for resentencing. On remand, appellant may again be sentenced as a habitual felony offender if the State is able to establish the predicate convictions. See Bover v. State, 797 So. 2d 1246, 1250 (Fla.2001) (remanding for proceedings consistent with the opinion and noting that the State should have the opportunity on remand to present record evidence that other prior convictions existed); Wainer v. State, 798 So. 2d 885, 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (reversing for resentencing and noting that, on remand, the State could again seek sentencing as a habitual felony offender subject to evidence of satisfactory predicate convictions).
REVERSED and REMANDED for re-sentencing.
BARFIELD, BROWNING and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ransom Louis Collins, 985 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 2008)…as enumerated in section 775.084, Florida Statutes); Cook v. State, 893 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (resentencing ordered where State failed to show that defendant’s prior convictions involved at least three different offenses); Klauer v. State, 873 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (resentencing ordered where State failed to prove defendant’s prior offenses qualified as section 775.084 enumerated offenses); Prudent v. State, 867 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (resentencing ordered where State failed to estab…
Authorities Cited
- Bover v. State, 797 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2001)
- Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Wainer v. State, 798 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Hemmy v. State, 835 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)