State v. Eason
| Decision Date | 06 February 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 78508,78508 |
| Citation | 592 So.2d 676 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. William Charles EASON, Respondent. 592 So.2d 676, 17 Fla. L. Week. S97 |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal--Certified Direct Conflict of Decisions, Third District--Case No. 90-2442 (Dade County).
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Michael J. Neimand, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for petitioner.
John L. Lipinski, Miami, for respondent.
We have for review State v. Eason, 592 So.2d 1106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), in which the district court certified conflict with State v. Allen, 573 So.2d 170 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Pittman v. State, 570 So.2d 1045 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 581 So.2d 166 (Fla.1991); and Donald v. State, 562 So.2d 792 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So.2d 291 (1991). *
Eason was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender under section 775.084(4)(b)(1), Florida Statutes (1989), to twenty-five years in prison. The State appealed the sentence and the district court affirmed.
The State argues that sentencing under the habitual offender statute is mandatory, not permissive, and thus the trial court was required to sentence the defendant to life in prison without eligibility for release for fifteen years, the maximum penalty set forth in the statute.
We rejected the State's interpretation of the habitual offender statute and disapproved Donald in Burdick v. State, No. 78,466 --- So.2d ---- (Fla. Feb. 6, 1992), where we held that sentencing under both sections 775.084(4)(a)(1) and 775.084(4)(b)(1) is permissive, not mandatory.
Accordingly, we approve the opinion below and disapprove Allen and Pittman to the extent they are inconsistent with our opinion in Burdick.
It is so ordered.
* We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Morales
...for appellee. Before JORGENSON, COPE and SHEVIN, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Burdick v. State, 594 So.2d 267 (Fla.1992); State v. Eason, 592 So.2d 676 (Fla.1992); Zequeira v. State, 671 So.2d 279, 279 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)("Sentencing under the habitual offender statute as well as the imposition......
-
State v. Hudson
...we conclude that the court's sentencing discretion extends to determining whether to impose a mandatory minimum term. Cf. State v. Eason, 592 So.2d 676 (Fla.1992) (rejecting State's argument that trial court was required to sentence habitual violent felony offender to life term without elig......
-
Span v. State
...sentence under section 775.084(4)(a)1. and remanding for reinstatement of the 40–year sentence imposed by the trial court); State v. Eason, 592 So.2d 676 (Fla.1992) (approving decision affirming defendant's 25–year sentence as an HVFO and rejecting State's argument that the trial court was ......
-
Newell v. State
...we conclude that the court's sentencing discretion extends to determining whether to impose a mandatory minimum term. Cf. State v. Eason, 592 So.2d 676 (Fla.1992) (rejecting State's argument that trial court was required to sentence habitual violent felony offender to life term without elig......