DWAYNE CORDELL PINESTRAW, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
DWAYNE CORDELL PINESTRAW, PETITIONER,
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
161 So. 3d 1282
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2015)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits.
WOLF, BENTON, and RAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reed v. State, 192 So. 3d 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…ection did not change Reed’s overall twenty-five-year. term of imprisonment. . This is not the first time Apprendi concerns have arisen in relation to section 775.082(10). However, no court in Florida has yet reached the issue. See Murphy v. State, 161 So. 3d 1282, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); Murray v. State, 133 So. 3d 557, 558-59 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Sprott v. State, 99 So. 3d 634, 635 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Jones v. State, 71 So. 3d 173, 174 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). But see Jones, 71 So. 3d at 176-79 (Thomas, J.,…
-
Marlena Christine Woods v. State, 214 So. 3d 803 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…we have a recurring issue. Multiple defendants have raised Apprendi-Blakely challenges to § 775.082(10) in this court and other courts within the last six years only to have the issue side-stepped and remain unaddressed. See, e.g., Murphy v. State, 161 So. 3d 1282, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015); Murray v. State, 133 So. 3d 557, 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Sprott v. State, 99 So. 3d 634, 635 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Jones v. State, 71 So. 3d 173, 174 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); see also Casper v. State, 187 So. 3d 255, 257 (Fla.…1 / 3
-
Kenitra Monae Casper v. State, 187 So. 3d 255 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). See also Hurst v. Florida, — U.S. -, —-, 136 S.Ct. 616, 623, 193 L.Ed.2d 504, - (2016). Our court, though being presented with the issue, has avoided writing an opinion on it. See, e.g., Murphy v. State, 161 So. 3d 1282, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (“[W]é do not reach appellant’s alternate claim that section 775.082(10) is unconstitutional under Ap-prendi and its progeny because the statute deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right to a jury determination of any fact…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence