Williams v. State

Decision Date17 April 2009
Docket NumberNo. 5D08-881.,5D08-881.
Citation10 So.3d 1116
PartiesLacharvis WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals
10 So.3d 1116
Lacharvis WILLIAMS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D08-881.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
April 17, 2009.

[10 So.3d 1117]

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Susan A. Fagan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

MONACO, J.


Although the appellant, Lacharvis Williams, raises a number of issues in this appeal from his judgment and sentence for second degree murder while carrying or possessing a firearm, burglary of a dwelling while in possession of a firearm, and grand theft, we find only one issue to be meritorious. Because the sentence imposed upon him for grand theft should not have been consecutive to the other sentences he received, we reverse for resentencing regarding this crime.

After the conclusion of his jury trial the State filed a notice of its intention to seek habitual offender status with respect to Mr. Williams, as well as a notice of his qualification as a prison releasee reoffender. At sentencing Mr. Williams was found to be both a prison releasee reoffender and a habitual violent felony offender. As to the murder and burglary charges, the trial court sentenced him to serve life sentences as a prison releasee reoffender. As to the grand theft charge, Mr. Williams was sentenced to ten years imprisonment as a habitual violent felony offender (with five years being mandatory), to be served consecutively to the two life sentences.

On appeal Mr. Williams argues that his sentence for grand theft should not have been imposed consecutively to the other sentences because all charges grew out of the same criminal episode, and because the habitual violent felony offender sentence had already been enhanced. He argues, and we agree, that the point of Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 909, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994) and Daniels v. State, 595 So.2d 952 (Fla.1992), was that once the habitual offender sentencing scheme was utilized to enhance a sentence beyond the statutory maximum on one or more counts arising from a single criminal episode, consecutive sentencing cannot be used to further lengthen the overall sentence. See Fuller v. State, 867 So.2d 469, 470 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 887 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).

Although the State calls our attention to Reeves v. State, 920 So.2d 724 (Fla....

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Thomas v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • November 30, 2022
    ...... Hale. Id. at 195. In two subsequent. opinions we held that imposing habitual offender sentences to. run consecutively to. . 5. . unenhanced sentences was illegal if the offenses arose from. the same criminal episode. See Williams v. State,. 124 So.3d 286, 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (granting. postconviction relief where an unenhanced sentence was. ordered to run consecutively to an enhanced sentence and. articulating Swanson as holding "that a. combination of habitualized and nonhabitualized ......
  • Thomas v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • November 30, 2022
    ...... Hale. Id. at 195. In two subsequent. opinions we held that imposing habitual offender sentences to. run consecutively to. . 6. . unenhanced sentences was illegal if the offenses arose from. the same criminal episode. See Williams v. State,. 124 So.3d 286, 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (granting. postconviction relief where an unenhanced sentence was. ordered to run consecutively to an enhanced sentence and. articulating Swanson as holding "that a. combination of habitualized and nonhabitualized ......
  • Booth v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • September 18, 2009
    ......State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993). This concession was proper. See id.; Williams v. State, 10 So.3d 1116 (Fla. 5th. 18 So.3d 1144. DCA 2009). Therefore, we reverse as to this issue, with directions that the court impose the sentences concurrently on remand. Osorio Issue.         Next, Booth argues, and the State concedes, that Booth's conviction for third degree felony ......
  • Cotto v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 30, 2012
    ...sentences did not run afoul of Hale. We note that our holding directly conflicts with the Fifth District's decision in Williams v. State, 10 So.3d 1116 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009). There, the Fifth District reversed the trial court's imposition of a sentence enhanced under the habitual violent felo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Miscellaneous
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books The Florida Criminal Cases Notebook. Volume 1-2 Volume 2
    • April 30, 2021
    ...sentencing, which contemplates consecutive sentencing. Cotto v. State, 139 So. 3d 283 (Fla. 2014) disapproving Williams v. State , 10 So. 3d 1116 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) In reviewing a statute, the court will not look behind the statute’s plain language if the statute is clear and unambiguous. ......
  • Judgment and sentence
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books The Florida Criminal Cases Notebook. Volume 1-2 Volume 1
    • April 30, 2021
    ...in imposing a grand theft HO sentence consecutively to HO life sentences when the crimes occurred in the same event. Williams v. State, 10 So. 3d 1116 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) 7.3.2 Violent career criminals Topics covered: Matters pertaining to sentencing under §775.084, Florida Statutes, as a v......

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