Bloodworth v. State, 1D99-1472.
| Decision Date | 20 April 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D99-1472.,1D99-1472. |
| Parties | Joey BLOODWORTH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Glenna Joyce Reeves, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Joey Bloodworth (Bloodworth), arguing a double-jeopardy violation, appeals his sentences on three criminal counts. We affirm.
A jury found Bloodworth guilty of aggravated assault, causing bodily injury during an aggravated assault, and attempted armed kidnapping. Bloodworth committed these crimes in connection with his attempt to abduct at knifepoint a woman shopper from a Winn-Dixie parking lot on the afternoon of November 2, 1997, in Nassau County. We affirm without discussion Bloodworth's convictions.
Bloodworth's concurrent sentences were imposed, on two counts, pursuant to both the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act (PRRA), section 775.082(8), Florida Statutes (1997), and, as an habitual violent felony offender, pursuant to section 775.084(4)(b), Florida Statutes (1997).1 Bloodworth argues that his sentences put him in double jeopardy. This court however holds that no double jeopardy violation arises when a defendant is sentenced as both an habitual offender and as a reoffender under the PRRA.2See Smith v. State, 754 So.2d at 101 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) ( ). We thus affirm Bloodworth's sentences.3
We nevertheless, as we did in Smith, certify conflict with Adams v. State, 750 So.2d 659, (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), and certify the same question that we certified in Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 740 So.2d 529 (Fla. 1999), regarding the constitutionality of the PRRA.
We accordingly affirm Bloodworth's convictions and sentences, certify conflict with Adams, and again certify the same question of great public importance as certified in Woods and subsequent cases.
1. The trial judge, on March 26, 1999, sentenced Bloodworth both as an habitual violent felony offender and pursuant to the PRRA on counts one and three (count one: to ten years, with no eligibility for release for five years; count three: to life with no eligibility for release for fifteen years). The judge sentenced Bloodworth to thirty years on count two pursuant to the PRRA (not eligible for release for thirty years), but not as an habitual violent felony offender.
2. Bloodworth, serving a forty-year sentence for sexual battery with a deadly weapon committed in April 1980, was released from prison in August 1997. Bloodworth thus committed a new crime within three months of his release from prison. It is undisputed that Bloodworth qualifies as both an habitual violent offender and a prison releasee...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Richardson v. State, 1D98-4818.
...constitutional challenges to the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act (the Act) asserted by the appellant. See Bloodworth v. State, 754 So.2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Smith v. State, 754 So.2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Chambers v. State, 752 So.2d 64 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Turner v. State......
-
Price v. State, 1D99-2048.
...Florida Statutes (1997) as an habitual violent offender. We reject appellant's constitutional arguments. See Bloodworth v. State, 754 So.2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Chambers v. State, 752 So.2d 64 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Turner v. State, 745 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), rev. granted ___ So.2......
-
Johnson v. State, 4D98-4433.
...appellate decisions have been contrary to our Adams analysis. See Barge v. State, 763 So.2d 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Bloodworth v. State, 754 So.2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Chambers v. State, 764 So.2d 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Nichols v. State, 755 So.2d 782 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Palmore v.......
-
Finley v. State, 1D99-3271.
...double jeopardy proscriptions and, accordingly, we affirm. See Barge v. State, 763 So.2d 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Bloodworth v. State, 754 So.2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Smith v. State, 754 So.2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Miller v. State, 751 So.2d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. granted, 761 So.2......