Tims v. State, s. 90-3155
| Decision Date | 14 January 1992 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 90-3155,s. 90-3155 |
| Citation | 592 So.2d 741 |
| Parties | 17 Fla. L. Weekly D289 Steve Anthony TIMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. to 90-3159. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, David P. Gauldin, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Charlie McCoy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
* Appellant, Steve Anthony Tims, was convicted and sentenced as an habitual violent felony offender for numerous offenses, including grand theft, aggravated battery of a law enforcement officer and armed robbery, in five separate cases consolidated for purposes of appeal. We affirm appellant's convictions and sentences in all respects, and in doing so, write to discuss appellant's challenge to the constitutionality of the Habitual Felony Offender Act, Section 775.084, Florida Statutes, and to distinguish this court's recent opinion in Cecil B. Johnson v. State, 589 So.2d 1370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
In Cecil B. Johnson, this court held Chapter 89-280, Laws of Florida, section 775.084, the habitual felony offender statute, a violation of the one-subject rule of the Florida Constitution. 1 We note, however, that the narrow holding of Cecil B. Johnson, is predicated on two factors: (1) appellant Johnson had standing to challenge the constitutionality of Chapter 89-280 because his offense was committed within the time period between the October 1, 1989, effective date of the 1989 amendments to the habitual felony offender provisions and their re-enactment, effective May 2, 1991, as a part of the Florida Statutes, See State v. Combs, 388 So.2d 1029 (Fla.1980); (2) appellant Johnson could only be classified an habitual violent felony offender under the amended statute, as the offense which served as a basis for his classification as an habitual violent felony offender, a 1987 conviction for aggravated battery, was added by Chapter 89-280 to the list of offenses which will support classification as an habitual violent felony offender. Sec. 775.084(1)(b)1.k. Fla.Stat. (1989).
In the present case, although appellant Tims' present offenses were committed within the "window" period described in Cecil B. Johnson, appellant's prior offenses are such that he would qualify as an habitual violent felony offender under the 1988 statutory provisions. Because appellant would qualify as an habitual violent felony offender under the 1988 version of the statute, appellant may not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Johnson v. State, 92-3117
...of statutory amendments did not appear to prejudice defendant bringing "Johnson " challenge of 1989 statute); Tims v. State, 592 So.2d 741 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). From our review of Appellant's record and the sentencing transcript, we find that Appellant met all of the prerequisites for habitu......
-
Brown v. State, 91-876
...single-subject rule. We find appellant's challenge to be without merit and affirm this point on appeal. See Tims v. State, 592 So.2d 741 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). In Tims, we said our narrow holding in Johnson was predicated on two factors, only one of which applied to Tims: the occurrence of hi......
-
Lowe v. State
...sentencing under either the pre-amended or amended statute may not challenge the constitutionality of Chapter 89-280. Tims v. State, 592 So.2d 741 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); McNeil v. State, 588 So.2d 303 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); King v. State, 585 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA Until the conviction which ......
-
Freeman v. State, 92-684
...to allege that he could not have been classified as an habitual offender without the unconstitutional amendments. See Tims v. State, 592 So.2d 741 (Fla. 1st DCA1992) (if defendant would qualify as an habitual offender under the 1988 version of the statute, he may not challenge the constitut......