Capre v. State, 5D00-502.

Citation773 So.2d 92
Decision Date20 October 2000
Docket NumberNo. 5D00-502.,5D00-502.
PartiesMatthew Donald CAPRE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Thomas J. Lukashow, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Belle B. Schumann, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PLEUS, J.

Capre asserts he received an improper vindictive sentence1 of 42 months because he elected to go to trial rather than accept the state's pre-trial offer of a non-state prison sentence of 51 weeks in the county jail. He did not raise this issue below, nor did he avail himself of the remedy by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).

Capre's trial took place in February of 2000, after the effective date of amended rule 3.800(b). See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla.2000)

; Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) and 3.800 and Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h), 9.140, and 9.600, 761 So.2d 1015 (Fla.1999). Under Maddox, sentencing errors occurring after the effective date of amended rule 3.800(b), even fundamental ones, are barred if not raised at trial or in post-trial proceedings pursuant to rule 3.800. See Mancha v. State, 768 So.2d 1178 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

Accordingly, appellant's appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

THOMPSON, C.J., and COBB, J., concur.

1.See, e.g., Willard v. State, 717 So.2d 631 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)

("It goes almost without saying that a judge may not impose a greater sentence on a defendant because such defendant avails himself of his constitutional right to trial").

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Lewis v. State, 5D01-2494.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 11, 2002
    ...605 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Harvey v. State, 786 So.2d 595 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), review granted, 797 So.2d 585 (Fla.2001); Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Lewis's initial brief was filed after the effective date of the amendments to rule 3.800(b), consequently her claim of sen......
  • Labadie v. State, 5D01-2756.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 14, 2003
    ...a jury trial and the associated rights and privileges. A sentencing error may not be raised on appeal unless preserved. Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Durr v. State, 773 So.2d 644, 646 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Further on this issue, Labadie did not provide a transcript of his......
  • Henderson v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 5, 2003
    ...error on appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2000); Hayden v. State, 833 So.2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Henderson may, however, seek relief by raising this issue in a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.......
  • Harvey v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 20, 2001
    ...the merits of the single subject challenge raised by appellant for the first time in his amended initial brief. See Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (declining to reach merits of alleged sentencing error where defendant's trial had taken place after most recent amendments to......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT