JYNIO PHILIUS, 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 a three-year mandatory minimum sentence was unauthorized by the statute under which the appellant was convicted, despite the appellant's agreement to the sentence in a plea agreement.
The appellant was charged with and pled no contest to violating section 893.13(6)(c), Florida Statutes. The trial court denied his postconviction moti…
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 Unauthorized Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his postconviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the appellant’s three-year mandatory minimum sentence is not authorized by the statute which he was convicted of violating, we reverse.
The appellant was charged with and pled no contest to violating section 893.13(6)(c), Florida Statutes (2003). Section 893.13(6)(e) states that any person who violates the statute is guilty of a first-degree felony, punishable as provided in sections 775.082, 775.083, or 775.084. However, none of these statutes provide for a three-year mandatory minimum. The trial court based the denial of the appellant’s motion on the fact that section 893.135(l)(k)2.a., Florida Statutes, authorizes the imposition of a three-year mandatory minimum for possession of more than 10 grams of MDMA. However, the appellant was clearly charged and convicted of violating section 893.13(6)(c), which does not contain a mandatory minimum. The fact that the appellant specifically agreed to this sentence in his plea agreement does not prevent him from raising this claim in a postconviction motion. Darling v. State, 886 So. 2d 417, 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Because the appellant’s three-year mandatory minimum sentence is unauthorized by section 893.13(6)(c), Florida Statutes, the trial court erred in denying the appellant’s motion.
We, therefore, reverse the trial court’s order and remand for resentencing. We note that the state may either agree to the resentencing or withdraw from the original plea agreement. Bruno v. State, 837 So. 2d 521, 523 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
KAHN, C.J., DAVIS and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Epperson v. State, 955 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…n challenging fifteen-year sentence imposed for third degree felony pursuant to negotiated plea, with directions to impose lawful sentence if the state agrees or to allow defendant to withdraw plea and proceed on original charges); Philius v. State, 936 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (reversing summary denial of rule 3.800(a) motion because three-year minimum mandatory sentence was not authorized by the statute defendant was convicted of violating, and remanding for resentencing; providing, however, that the…
Authorities Cited
- Bruno v. State, 837 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Evans Darling v. State, 886 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)