WILLIAM E. BYNES
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 4th DCA | 2025-02-12
No. 4D2024-2711
383 So. 3d 816 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2025) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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

Predicate convictions necessary to impose a violent career criminal sentence need not be submitted to a jury.

Headnotes

[1] Predicate convictions necessary to impose a violent career criminal sentence need not be submitted to a jury and need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

Previewing 1 of 1 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
Facts & Procedural History

William E. Bynes appealed an order denying his Rule 3.800 motion in a violent career criminal sentencing case from Palm Beach County.…

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.

Topics
Predicate Convictions Rule 3.800 Motion

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Predicate Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Howard K. Coates, Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. 502001CF000912A.

William E. Bynes, Everglades, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Sustakoski v. State, 992 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (the requisite predicate convictions necessary to impose a violent career criminal sentence need not be submitted to a jury); see also Lee v. State, 383 So. 3d 816, 817 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024).1 KLINGENSMITH, C.J., CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Footnotes
1 Similar to Lee, we acknowledge that appellant has argued the Court’s decision in Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024) may be dispositive in the instant case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Bynes v. State, 383 So. 3d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Sustakoski v. State, 992 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (the requisite predicate convictions necessary to impose a violent career criminal sentence need not be submitted to a jury); see also Lee v. State, 383 So. 3d 816, 817 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024).1 KLINGENSMITH, C.J., CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 1 Similar to Lee, we acknowledge that appellant has argued the Court’s decision in Erlinger v.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw