HARLEY ROY WALKER, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Walker was sentenced under both the habitual felony offender statute and the prison releasee reoffender statute for three burglary convictions. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the sentences, holding that a court cannot impose dual sentences under both statutes for the same offense, and remanded for resentencing under only the prison releasee reoffender act.
A court can only decline to enter a prison releasee reoffender sentence when it imposes a harsher habitual felony offender sentence. A defendant cannot receive two sentences under two separate statutes for the same crime. The prison releasee reoffender act serves as the mandatory minimum sentence floor.
[1] Sentencing a defendant as both a prison releasee reoffender and a habitual violent felony offender for the same offenses violates double jeopardy principles.
[2] A trial court may not impose a sentence under both the prison releasee reoffender statute and the habitual offender statute for the same offense.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Since the court can only decline to enter a prison releasee reoffender sentence when it imposes a harsher habitual felony offender sentence, we reverse appellant's sentences imposed under the habitual felony offender act and the prison releasee reoffender act and remand for resentencing under only the prison releasee reoffender act.”
States the core holding that dual sentencing under both statutes for the same offense is impermissible.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarley Roy Walker was convicted of three separate counts of burglary of a dwelling. The trial court sentenced him to three concurrent 15-year prison t…
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 Prison Releasee Reoffender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Harley Roy, was sentenced as both a habitual felony offender (section 775.084(l)(a), (3)(a), (4)(a), Florida Statutes (1999)), and a prison releasee reoffender (section 775.082(9), Florida Statutes (1999)) to three concurrent 15-year prison terms on three separate convictions for burglary of a dwelling.
Since the court can only decline to enter a prison releasee reoffender sentence when it imposes a harsher habitual felony offender sentence, we reverse appellant’s sentences imposed under the habitual felony offender act and the prison releasee reoffender act and remand for resentencing under only the prison releas-ee reoffender act. See Glave v. State, 745 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Adams v. State, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
As we did in Valentino v. State, 765 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), West v. State, 758 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), and Brooks v. State, 764 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), we certify conflict with our sister courts in Alfonso v. State, 761 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), rev. dismissed by, No. SC00-1249, 767 So. 2d 453 (Fla. Jun.21, 2000); Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); and Grant v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), rev. granted, No. SC99-164, 761 So. 2d 329 (Fla. Apr. 12, 2000), on the issue of whether the double jeopardy clause precludes sentencing a defendant as both a prison releasee reoffender and a habitual felony offender. The state points to State v. Cotton, 25 Fla. L. Weekly S463, -— So. 2d -, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000), as authority that Glave and Adams are no longer valid. The issue of whether there is a double jeopardy violation in imposing both a prison releasee reoffender sentence and a habitual offender sentence was not discussed in Cotton. The court noted that the act creates a sentencing floor, as a mandatory sentencing scheme. What we said in Adams is consistent with that statement. The act requires that the court sentence a defendant as a prison releasee reoffender unless a harsher sentence can be imposed under the habitual offender statute or other provision of law. Thus, the prison releasee reoffender acts as the mandatory minimum sentence, but it does not mean that appellant can receive two sentences under two separate statutes for the same crime.
We certify to the Florida Supreme Court as a question of great public importance:
Is it a violation of double jeopardy principles to sentence a defendant under both the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act and the habitual offender statute for the same offense?
Finally, we stay our mandate pending resolution of the certified question by the supreme court.
WARNER, C.J., STONE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harley Roy Walker v. State, 792 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…PER CURIAM. In State v. Walker, 788 So. 2d 956(Fla.2001), the supreme court vacated our opinion in Walker v. State, 765 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), and directed that we reconsider the case upon application of Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000). In the instant case, as our prior opinion stated, Walker was sentenced both as a habitual felony offender and a prison re-le…
-
State v. Harley Roy Walker, 788 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 2001)…LEWIS, J. We have for review Walker v. State, 765 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We vacate the decision of the district court and remand for reconsideration upon application of our decisions in Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000); State v. Cott…
Authorities Cited
- Pollock v. Couffer, 750 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Smith v. State, 754 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Ames v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Grant v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Glave v. State, 745 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Carter v. State, 761 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- West v. State, 758 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Freddrick Brooks v. State, 764 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Valentino v. State, 765 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- O'Brien v. State, 765 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)