ELPIDIO PEREZ-HERRERA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Elpidio Perez-Herrera appeals his amended sentence for armed trafficking in cocaine, challenging the trial court's imposition of a mandatory minimum three-year sentence under Florida Statute 775.087(2). The appellate court agreed that the statute does not apply to cocaine trafficking and reversed the three-year mandatory minimum.
The mandatory minimum three-year provision of section 775.087(2) does not apply to cocaine trafficking because trafficking in cocaine is not one of the crimes enumerated in that statute. The three-year mandatory minimum was therefore improper and must be reversed.
[1] The mandatory minimum three-year sentence provision of § 775.087(2), Florida Statutes, is not applicable to the crime of trafficking in cocaine, as cocaine trafficking is…
[2] A mandatory minimum sentence under § 775.087(2), Florida Statutes, requires that the underlying offense be specifically listed within that statute.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The mandatory minimum three-year provision of subsection 775.087(2) is not applicable because trafficking in cocaine is not one of the crimes enumerated in that statute.”
Statement of the core holding regarding the inapplicability of the three-year mandatory minimum to cocaine trafficking.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePerez-Herrera was convicted of armed trafficking in cocaine, conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, and attempted robbery with a firearm. The trial court i…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mandatory Minimum Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant Elpidio Perez-Herrera appeals the amended sentence imposed on him for armed trafficking in cocaine.* Defendant does not challenge the fifteen-year sentence on that count, nor the fact that the sentence is subject to the mandatory minimum fifteen-year term required by subsection 893.135(1), Florida Statutes (1987). Defendant contends, however, that the trial court erred by imposing a mandatory minimum three-year sentence pursuant to subsection 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (1987), to be served concurrently with the mandatory minimum fifteen-year sentence. We agree. The mandatory minimum three-year provision of subsection 775.087(2) is not applicable because trafficking in cocaine is not one of the crimes enumerated in that statute. See Sammons v. State, 481 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 2d DCA), cause dismissed, 486 So. 2d 597 (Fla.1986) (no three-year mandatory minimum sentence for carrying a concealed firearm while conspiring to traffic and trafficking in cannabis because defendant did not commit a crime listed in the statute); see also Robertson v. State, 519 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (carrying a concealed weapon); Previlon v. State, 500 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (possession and display of a firearm); Davis v. State, 392 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (possession and display of a firearm).
We reverse that portion of the sentencing order containing the mandatory minimum three-year term and remand for entry of a corrected sentence.
*
Defendant was also convicted of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine and attempted robbery with a firearm and was sentenced to fifteen years incarceration on both counts, to be served concurrently. Herrera does not appeal from either the convictions or sentences on those two counts.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Davis v. State, 392 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Roges Previlon v. State, 500 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Wen-Dic Constr. Co., Inc. v. Ingersoll-Rand Fin. Corp., 481 So. 2d 1315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Robertson v. State, 519 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)