VERNON DONALDSON, 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.
Vernon Donaldson challenged his habitual violent felony offender sentence, arguing that his prior conviction for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer was not an enumerated felony under Florida's statute. The court reversed the denial of his motion because the applicable statute required aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, not aggravated assault alone, and the postconviction court failed to provide evidence refuting his claim.
A prior conviction for aggravated assault alone does not qualify as an enumerated felony under the applicable statute; the statute requires aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The postconviction court erred by summarily denying Donaldson's facially sufficient motion without providing records that conclusively refute his claim.
[1] A prior conviction for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer may not qualify for a habitual violent felony offender sentence if the version of the statute appli…
[2] A state must demonstrate that an aggravated assault was committed with a deadly weapon to support a habitual violent felony offender sentence under section 775.084(1)(b),…
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“Pursuant to section 775.084(l)(b), Florida Statutes, prior to imposing a habitual violent felony offender sentence the sentencing court must find that the defendant has been previously convicted of an enumerated felony.”
Establishes the legal requirement for imposing a habitual violent felony offender sentence
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDonaldson was sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender based on a prior conviction for aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. The sen…
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 Aggravated Assault On A Law Enforcement Officer cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant has filed a rule 3.800(a) motion asserting that his habitual violent felony offender sentence is illegal because his prior offense of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer is not an enumerated felony under section 775.084(l)(b), Florida Statutes (2000). To support his allegations, the appellant indicates that the records demonstrate an entitlement to relief and he has attached a copy of the state’s notice of intent to classify him as a habitual violent felony offender which establishes he was previously convicted of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer. We reverse the denial of the appellant’s facially sufficient motion and remand.
Pursuant to section 775.084(l)(b), Florida Statutes, prior to imposing a habitual violent felony offender sentence the sentencing court must find that the defendant has been previously convicted of an enumerated felony. Prior versions of the statute permitted a habitual violent felony offender sentence for aggravated assault; however, the version applicable to the appellant’s case requires aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. § 775.084(l)(b)(l)(g), Fla. Stat. (2000). At sentencing, in order to support a habitual felony violent offender sentence, the state must show that the aggravated assault was committed with a deadly weapon. See McCoy v. State, 942 So.2d 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). The postconviction court has failed to attach any records refuting the appellant’s claim that his prior offense of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer does not qualify for a habitualized sentence.
Accordingly, we reverse the summary denial of the appellant’s motion and remand for record attachments which conclusively refute the appellant’s claim or if appropriate, to resentence the appellant without the habitual felony offender designation.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DAVIS, PADOVANO, and LEWIS, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fabricio Gomez v. State, 942 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- McCOY v. State, 942 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)