GOLDEN VASQUEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2009-03-04
No. 4D08-4186
GROSS, C.J., POLEN and MAY, JJ., concur.
2 So. 3d 1126 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2009) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court affirmed the denial of one point of appeal but reversed and remanded for further review of another point concerning a habitual offender sentence.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant challenged her habitual offender sentence, alleging that the release dates for her predicate convictions fell outside the five-year period r…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Golden Vasquez appeals the denial of her motion to correct or vacate an illegal sentence whereby she challenges her habitual offender sentence. We affirm the denial of point one but reverse and remand for further review of Vasquez’s second point.

In that claim, Vasquez alleged that the release date(s) associated with her predicate convictions were not within the requisite five-year period. The habitual offender statute requires that a defendant’s last prior felony or release from imprisonment be within five years of the date of the current felony offense. See Fla. Stat. § 775.084(l)(a)(2005). See, e.g., Sosa v. State, 902 So.2d 186 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. den. 919 So.2d 436 (Fla.2005).

This claim is cognizable and not refuted by the record. See Bover v. State, 797 So.2d 1246, 1251 (Fla.2001). We reverse and remand for the attachment of portions of the record that conclusively refute this claim. If an evidentiary hearing would be required to establish the date of her release, this claim may not be raised in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Seward v. State, 990 So.2d 655 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

Affirmed in part; reversed in parti cmd remanded.

GROSS, C.J., POLEN and MAY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Golden Vasquez v. State, 133 So. 3d 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
    …to prison officials for disciplinary procedures. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla.1999). See also § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2012); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(n). Affirmed. DAMOORGIAN, C.J., MAY and CONNER, JJ., concur. . Vasquez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (08-4186); Vasquez v. State, 30 So. 3d 509 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (09-2400) (PCA/3.800); Vasquez v. State, 78 So. 3d 550 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (09-5226) (PCA/3.850); Vasquez v. State, 107 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (12-4120); Vasq…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw