TERRY GREEN, 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 appellate court reversed a trial court's decision to sentence a defendant as a Sexual Predator. The defendant argued the offenses occurred before the act's effective date, and the state conceded the trial court failed to provide sufficient record evidence to refute this claim.
The appellate court held that the trial court erred by failing to attach portions of the record conclusively demonstrating that the appellant's crimes were committed after the Act's effective date. The court reversed and remanded for the trial court to either provide such documentation or strike the designation.
[1] A Sexual Predator designation is improper if the offenses upon which it is based occurred prior to the effective date of the Sexual Predators Act.
[2] A trial court must attach portions of the record that conclusively demonstrate an offense occurred after the effective date of the Sexual Predators Act when a defendant c…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“He claims that the attempted sexual battery occurred prior to the effective date of the Sexual Predators Act, section 775.21(4)(a), Florida Statutes, which states that the Sexual Predators Act applies to offenses committed on or after October 1, 1993.”
This quote establishes the appellant's primary argument on appeal regarding the timing of the offenses relative to the Sexual Predators Act.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was sentenced as a Sexual Predator, arguing the underlying offenses occurred before the effective date of the Sexual Predators Act. The …
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 Retroactive Application Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant filed the instant rule 3.800(a) motion arguing that the trial court erred by sentencing him as a Sexual Predator. He claims that the attempted sexual battery occurred prior to the effective date of the Sexual Predators Act, section 775.21(4)(a), Florida Statutes, which states that the Sexual Predators Act applies to offenses committed on or after October 1, 1993. He asserts that the attempted sexu*249al battery was committed against his stepdaughter during his marriage, and that the dates asserted by the State in its information relate to the dates of his marriage and his subsequent divorce, and that he was not living in the home after the date that the Sexual Predators Act took effect. Thus, he claims, he is not subject to the Sexual Predators Act. He seeks to have this designation rescinded. See Lowery v. State, 98 So.3d 163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
In Lowery, the defendant complained that his Sexual Predator designation was improper because he was convicted of offenses that occurred prior to the effective date of the Sexual Predators Act. The information actually charged the defendant with committing offenses both before the effective date of the Act as well as after, as is the situation in the instant ease. This court reversed and remanded for the trial court to attach portions of the record conclusively demonstrating that the defendant’s crimes were committed after the Act’s effective date, or to strike the defendant’s Sexual Predator designation.
The State has conceded that the trial court failed to attach the portion of the record that conclusively refutes the appellant’s claim, and that the case should be reversed and remanded for record attachments refuting the claim.
Therefore, as in Lowery, we reverse and remand for the trial court to either attach the portion of the record that conclusively refutes the appellant’s claim, or, if no such documents exist, for the trial court to strike the appellant’s Sexual Predator designation.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
WOLF, PADOVANO, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shamiekka Ford v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Lowery v. State, 98 So. 3d 163 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)