DALLIS YOUNG, 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.
The court held that the trial court's summary denial of the motion was improper because the record did not conclusively establish that the defendant was not entitled to relief.
The defendant appealed the summary denial of his motion for resentencing under the unconstitutional 1995 sentencing guidelines, alleging his sentence …
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 Heggs V. State Resentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
Young appeals from the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). He alleges he was sentenced under the unconstitutional 1995 sentencing guidelines, and he is entitled to resentencing pursuant to Heggs.
Young alleges his offenses were committed during the window period of unconstitutionality,2 and that the length of the sentence he received was in excess of the 1994 guidelines. We agree Young is entitled to further consideration.
The state argues that Young is not entitled to be resentenced because his conviction and sentence were the product of a negotiated guilty plea. The documents attached, specifically the scoresheet, indicates there was a trial and Young merely alleges he was sentenced pursuant to a plea. Thus at this posture, the court records attached to the summary denial do not on their face show Young is entitled to no relief. See, e.g., Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (burden is on trial court summarily denying facially sufficient Rule 3.800(a) motion to attach portions of record establishing why defendant is not entitled to relief sought).
On remand, the court may again deny the motion after attaching sufficient court records to show Young is not entitled to any relief, for example, if his sentence was the result of a plea to a specific sentence. See, e.g., Dunenas v. Moore, 762 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Plute v. State, 765 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). If the court determines Young is entitled to be resentenced pursuant to Heggs, it may grant that relief.
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000).
. Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla.2000).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Govea v. State, 785 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…relief to Govea because it found he had been sentenced 'pursuant to a plea agreement to a term of 15 years in prison, followed by 20 years on probation. Thus, the unconstitutional guidelines were not implicated in the sentencing. See Young v. State, 766 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Dunenas v. Moore, 762 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). However in this case, the agreed-to sentence’s length (35 years) for Count I exceeds the statutory maximum for the crime of which Govea was convicted — attempted capital sexu…
-
Burns v. State, 770 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…, we remand this cause to the trial court for the purpose of attaching such potions of the record as may be required to show Burns is not entitled to the relief he seeks. See Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Young v. State, [*761] 766 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). If the court determines that Burns is entitled to be resentenced pursuant to Heggs, it may grant that relief. REVERSED and REMANDED. COBB and PETERSON, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Xzavier Trapp v. State, 760 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 2000)
- Durwin D. Dunenas v. Moore, 762 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Plute v. State, 765 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)