Lee v. State, No. 86531

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtHARDING; KOGAN
Citation679 So.2d 1158
Parties21 Fla. L. Weekly S269 Charles W. LEE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Decision Date27 June 1996
Docket NumberNo. 86531

Page 1158

679 So.2d 1158
21 Fla. L. Weekly S269
Charles W. LEE, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 86531.
Supreme Court of Florida.
June 27, 1996.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 24, 1996.

Charles W. Lee, Lake City, Petitioner pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; James W. Rogers, Tallahassee Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals and Thomas Falkinburg,

Page 1159

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

HARDING, Justice.

We have for review a decision passing upon the following question certified to be of great public importance:

WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT'S FAILURE TO CONSIDER A DEFENDANT FOR CLASSIFICATION AS A YOUTHFUL OFFENDER IS COGNIZABLE UNDER RULE 3.800(a), FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.

Lee v. State, 667 So.2d 253 (Fla.App. 1st DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's order denying Lee's 3.800(a) motion 1 to correct an illegal sentence. Lee claimed that his sentence was illegal because the trial judge improperly refused to classify him as a youthful offender. For the reasons expressed below, we approve the decision of the district court.

On August 3, 1981, Lee pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 120 years in prison. Because the offense occurred on November 18, 1980, when he was seventeen years old, Lee argued that he should have been classified as a youthful offender under section 958.04(2), Florida Statutes (1979). 2 After the circuit court denied his motion to correct an illegal sentence, he appealed to the First District Court of Appeal.

The district court found that the 1980 version of section 958.04(2) applied in Lee's case, which only mandated consideration of the criteria contained in the statute. 3 It did not mandate that every defendant to whom it applied be sentenced as a youthful offender.

The district court did, however, question the trial court's finding that because Lee was convicted of a "life felony," he was not even eligible for consideration under the youthful offender statute. The district court found that although second-degree murder was punishable under section 782.04(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1980), by prison term "not exceeding life," this does not mean that it is a life felony for chapter 958 purposes.

The district court affirmed Lee's sentence under Davis v. State, 661 So.2d 1193 (Fla.1995), where this Court held that a sentence is only illegal if it exceeds the maximum prescribed by law. However, the court recognized that Davis was not completely on point, since Davis concerned a departure from the sentencing guidelines not supported by written reasons, and Lee's case concerns a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 practice notes
  • McKenzie v. Sec'y, Case No. 8:15-cv-1531-T-33JSS
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • September 16, 2016
    ...Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(c). A Trial Court's error in failing to consider Youthful Offender is cognizable on direct appeal see Lee v State, 679 So.2d 1158, 1160 (Fla.1996). Since the Defendant could have and did raise the issue of his sentencing on direct appeal, he is prohibited now from brinin......
  • Farina v. State, No. SC93050.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • August 16, 2001
    ...2597, 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991). This evidence, accordingly, complies with our decision in Anthony's original direct appeal. See Farina, 679 So.2d at 1158 (explaining that on remand the State may present victim impact evidence as long as it comes within the parameters of Payne). Thus, we find ......
  • Wright v. State, No. 2D13–5816.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 21, 2014
    ...v. State, 112 So.3d 1158 (Fla.2013); Cote v. State, 793 So.2d 907 (Fla.2001); Summers v. State, 684 So.2d 729 (Fla.1996); Lee v. State, 679 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1996); State v. Griffith, 675 So.2d 911 (Fla.1996); Hughes v.. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (......
  • Hampton v. State, No. 2D15–474.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 1, 2015
    ...CURIAM. Affirmed. See Tisdol v. State, 794 So.2d 576 (Fla.2001) ; Summers v. State, 684 So.2d 729 (Fla.1996) ; Lee v. State, 679 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1996) ; Henderson v. State, 61 So.3d 494 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) ; Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (F......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
27 cases
  • McKenzie v. Sec'y, Case No. 8:15-cv-1531-T-33JSS
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Florida
    • September 16, 2016
    ...Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(c). A Trial Court's error in failing to consider Youthful Offender is cognizable on direct appeal see Lee v State, 679 So.2d 1158, 1160 (Fla.1996). Since the Defendant could have and did raise the issue of his sentencing on direct appeal, he is prohibited now from brinin......
  • Farina v. State, No. SC93050.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • August 16, 2001
    ...2597, 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991). This evidence, accordingly, complies with our decision in Anthony's original direct appeal. See Farina, 679 So.2d at 1158 (explaining that on remand the State may present victim impact evidence as long as it comes within the parameters of Payne). Thus, we find ......
  • Wright v. State, No. 2D13–5816.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 21, 2014
    ...v. State, 112 So.3d 1158 (Fla.2013); Cote v. State, 793 So.2d 907 (Fla.2001); Summers v. State, 684 So.2d 729 (Fla.1996); Lee v. State, 679 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1996); State v. Griffith, 675 So.2d 911 (Fla.1996); Hughes v.. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (......
  • Hampton v. State, No. 2D15–474.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 1, 2015
    ...CURIAM. Affirmed. See Tisdol v. State, 794 So.2d 576 (Fla.2001) ; Summers v. State, 684 So.2d 729 (Fla.1996) ; Lee v. State, 679 So.2d 1158 (Fla.1996) ; Henderson v. State, 61 So.3d 494 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) ; Hughes v. State, 22 So.3d 132 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ; Brown v. State, 827 So.2d 1054 (F......
  • 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