Reeves v. State
| Decision Date | 03 December 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 79386,79386 |
| Citation | 612 So.2d 560 |
| Parties | 17 Fla. L. Week. S739 James REEVES, III, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal--Certified Great Public Importance, First District--Case No. 90-3336 (Duval County).
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender and Steven A. Been, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and James W. Rogers, Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, and Carolyn J. Mosley, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.
We have for review Reeves v. State, 593 So.2d 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), in which the district court affirmed Reeves' sentence as a habitual violent felony offender and certified the following questions as being of great public importance:
1. Does section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1989), authorize habitual felon sentencing for a criminal defendant who has previously been convicted of a violent offense enumerated in the statute, but who is currently being sentenced for a non-violent offense?
2. If section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1989), authorizes habitual felon sentencing for a criminal defendant who is currently being sentenced for a non-violent offense, does the statute violate the constitutional principles of equal protection, due process, double jeopardy, or ex post facto?
Id. at 232. 1 We answer the first question in the affirmative, the second question in the negative, and approve the decision of the district court.
In Tillman v. State, 609 So.2d 1295 (Fla.1992), we recently held that section 775.084(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1989), does not violate the constitutional protections against double jeopardy. In Ross v. State, 601 So.2d 1190 (Fla.1992), we held that section 775.084(1)(b) does not violate equal protection or due process. This court has also rejected ex post facto challenges to the habitual offender statute in Reynolds v. Cochran, 138 So.2d 500 (Fla.1962); Washington v. Mayo, 91 So.2d 621 (Fla.1956); and Cross v. State, 96 Fla. 768, 119 So. 380 (1928).
It is so ordered.
I dissent on the basis of my dissenting opinion in Tillman v. State, 609 So.2d 1295 (Fla.1992). The petitioner has only been convicted of one violent crime and therefore cannot be a habitual violent felony offender.
1 We have jurisdiction. Art. V, Sec. 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Heath v. State
...the habitual felony offender statute violates the constitutional guarantees of due process of law and equal protection. See Reeves v. State, 612 So.2d 560 (Fla.1992) (holding that habitual felon sentencing under statute does not violate constitutional principles of equal protection, due pro......
-
Kirk v. State, 94-2089
...had been applied in violation of their right to equal protection of the law. Seabrook v. State, 629 So.2d 129 (Fla.1993); Reeves v. State, 612 So.2d 560 (Fla.1992); Ross v. State, 601 So.2d 1190 (Fla.1992). 2 Many of these challenges included a specific claim of racial discrimination in the......
-
Howard v. State, 94-2570
...Statutes (1989), nor in his contention that the trial court erred in not using a sentencing guidelines scoresheet. See Reeves v. State, 612 So.2d 560 (Fla.1992); Sec. 775.084(4)(e), Fla.Stat. (1989); Holley v. State, 577 So.2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). We find merit in appellant's claim that......
-
Smith v. State, 91-2431
...State, 601 So.2d 1190 (Fla.1992); Tillman v. State, 609 So.2d 1295 (Fla.1992); Becker v. State, 612 So.2d 559 (Fla.1992); Reeves v. State, 612 So.2d 560 (Fla.1992). ERVIN, SMITH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur. ...