Frierson v. State, 86-2201
| Decision Date | 02 July 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-2201,86-2201 |
| Citation | 511 So.2d 1016,12 Fla. L. Weekly 1616 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1616 Therion FRIERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Therion Frierson, pro se, Polk City.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Sean Daly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
The defendant, Frierson, was convicted in 1985 of burglary of a structure, and sentenced to a term of ten years, the trial judge departing from the guidelines based on a finding that Frierson was an habitual offender. He appealed that conviction but not the sentence, and there was an affirmance by this court in March, 1986. In November, 1986, Frierson filed a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) 1 to reduce his sentence to conform to the guideline range of two-and-a-half to three-and-a-half years. The motion specifically relied upon the Florida Supreme Court case of Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla.1986). That motion was summarily denied by the trial judge on November 25, 1986, and this appeal ensued.
In Whitehead the Florida Supreme Court held that, in view of the sentencing guidelines, the habitual offender statute (§ 775.084) is no longer viable-- i.e., it was repealed by implication. See Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863, 867 (Fla.1986) (Overton, J., dissenting). See also Bass v. State, 12 FLW 289 (Fla. June 11, 1987). 2 Since section 775.084 was repealed by enactment of the guidelines as of October 1, 1983, the maximum legal sentence which could have been imposed upon Frierson in 1985 was five years, not ten years. 3 Rule 3.800(a) is available at any time to correct an illegal sentence, and the trial court erred in its summary denial of Frierson's motion.
Upon remand for resentencing, the trial court may not enter a departure sentence in excess of five years, and may not depart from the guidelines at all based merely on a simple finding that Frierson is "an habitual offender." Departure may be available in this case, however, if requisite findings are made in conformity with Williams v. State, 504 So.2d 392 (Fla.1987). See Brockington v. State, 506 So.2d 495 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).
REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.
1 The rule provides:
A court may at any time correct an illegal sentence imposed by it....
2 But see McCuiston v. State, 12 FLW 1357 (Fla. 2nd DCA May 29, 1987); Kiser v. State, 505 So.2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).
3 Frierson was convicted of burglary of a structure, which is a third-degree felony...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lipscomb v. State, 89-213
...Young v. State, 519 So.2d 719 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), quashed in, Lambert v. State, 545 So.2d 838 (Fla.1989); Frierson v. State, 511 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), disapproved in, McCuiston v. State, 534 So.2d 1144 (Fla.1988), and quashed, 542 So.2d 983 (Fla.1989); Keys v. State, 473 So.2d 80......
-
Morganti v. State, 87-0312
...Beahn v. State, 502 So.2d 15 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). The same also appears to be true with regard to the Fifth District. Frierson v. State, 511 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Only the Third District, without specifically addressing the issue, has held that, in such a case, the sentence on rema......
-
Inscho v. State
...The supreme court likewise so held in Whitehead v. State, 498 So.2d 863 (Fla.1986). This court followed Whitehead in Frierson v. State, 511 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). However, sometimes the guidelines authorize a sentence in excess of the statutory maximum, or there exist valid clear a......
-
McCuiston v. State
...507 So.2d 1185 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), because of conflict with Hall v. State, 511 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), and Frierson v. State, 511 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Jurisdiction is predicated upon article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. McCuiston was convicted of robbery. The......