Hester v. State, 1D18-1209

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Citation267 So.3d 1084
Docket NumberNo. 1D18-1209,1D18-1209
Parties Eddie L. HESTER Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Decision Date03 April 2019

267 So.3d 1084

Eddie L. HESTER Jr., Appellant,
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1209

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2019

Eddie L. Hester Jr., pro se, Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, and Barbara Debelius, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Winsor, J.

Eddie Hester Jr. was convicted of several crimes, all stemming from two Walmart robberies. A jury found him guilty of armed robbery, false imprisonment, kidnapping with a firearm, and—in a separate case—another count of armed robbery. The court sentenced him to consecutive terms based on the 10/20/Life law. See § 775.087, Fla. Stat. Hester appealed in both cases, and this court affirmed without opinion in both cases. See Hester v. State , 136 So.3d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (table).

Hester later filed a rule 3.800(a) motion, contending that consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences for certain of the counts were illegal because the offenses arose from a single criminal episode in which he did not fire a gun. See Williams v. State , 186 So.3d 989, 993 (Fla. 2016) (limiting availability of consecutive sentences under 10/20/Life statute). As Hester noted in his motion, the trial court imposed consecutive sentences based on this court's Walton v. State decision, 106 So.3d 522 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) ( Walton I ), which the Florida Supreme Court later rejected, Walton v. State , 208 So.3d 60 (Fla. 2016) ( Walton II ). Hester was sentenced after Walton I but before Walton II , so the sentence was legal at the time it was imposed. When Hester failed to appeal, the sentence became final.

The question, then, is whether Walton II , on which Hester now relies, applies retroactively. In Osei v. State , this court held that Williams v. State did not

267 So.3d 1086

apply retroactively because it involved statutory interpretation and was not "constitutional in nature." 226 So.3d 1077, 1078 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (evaluating retroactivity of Williams , 186 So.3d at 989 ); see also Jimenez v. State , 810 So.2d 511, 512-13 (Fla. 2001) (finding statutory-interpretation case not retroactive because it was not "constitutional in nature"). Because it was not retroactive, the new rule was not applicable to the postconviction proceeding at issue. Cf. Smith v. State , 598 So.2d 1063, 1066 n.5 (Fla. 1992) (noting...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Aspilaire v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 19-12605
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • April 6, 2021
    ...between a change in judicial doctrine and a change in law."). The same principle applies under Florida law. See Hester v. State , 267 So. 3d 1084, 1086 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019) (quoting Rivers , 511 U.S. at 313 n.12, 114 S.Ct. 1510 ). The prosecution in Williams was never valid under Flor......
  • Kimmons v. State, 1D16-0204
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 3, 2019
    ...criminal prosecution. The parties agree that the errors asserted here were unpreserved for appellate review. Accordingly, ordinary error 267 So.3d 1084is not enough, and reversal requires a showing of fundamental error. "[R]evoking probation based partly on a purported violation that was no......
  • Sokheang Im v. State, 2D21-825
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • October 8, 2021
    ...Nancy Moate Ley, Judge. Sokheang Im, pro se. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 60 So.3d 1045 (Fla. 2011); Hester v. State, 267 So.3d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019); Osei v. State, 226 So.3d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). VILLANTI, LUCAS, and STARGEL, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision ......
  • Morgan v. State, 3D19-37
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 3, 2019
    ...precedes the enactment of the 10-20-life statute. Morgan also argues that the First District's recent decision in Hester v. State, 267 So. 3d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019), is inapposite.5 We disagree,Page 7 and the First District's analysis provides additional support for the trial court's deni......
  • 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