VASHON OLAND LEWIS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Lewis was sentenced under both the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act and the habitual violent felony offender statute. The Florida Supreme Court approved vacating the lesser ten-year sentence, holding that while dual sentences are permissible, a court may only deviate from the Act's scheme to impose a greater sentence of incarceration.
Dual sentences under the Act and another recidivist statute are permissible, but section 775.082(8)(c) only authorizes a court to deviate from the Act's sentencing scheme to impose a greater sentence of incarceration. The district court correctly vacated the lesser sentence.
[1] Imposition of equal concurrent sentences under both the Habitual Felony Offender Act and the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act does not violate double jeopardy principles.
[2] A trial court is without authority to impose a sentence under the Habitual Felony Offender statute when it is equal to a sentence imposed under the Prison Releasee Reoffe…
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“section 775.082(8)(c) only authorizes [a sentencing] court to deviate from the [Act's] sentencing scheme to impose a greater sentence of incarceration”
The holding that clarifies the scope of permitted deviation under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act—courts may only impose greater sentences, not concurrent or equal sentences.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLewis was convicted and sentenced to fifteen years as a prison releasee reoffender and ten years as a habitual violent felony offender, along with ten…
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 Act cases and more on FLexlaw
LEWIS, J.
We have for review Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Lewis challenges his sentences under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act (“the Act”) and the habitual violent felony offender statute. The district court interpreted subsection (8)(c) of the Act to mean that it “does not provide for dual sentences.” 751 So. 2d at 107.1 This unqualified statement is contrary to our determination in Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655, 657-59 (Fla.2000), in which we determined that the imposition of sentences under both the Act and the habitual felony offender statute did not violate principles of double jeopardy. However, we did determine that the imposition of equal, concurrent sentences violated the language of the Act itself. Lewis was sentenced here to fifteen years as a prison releasee reoffen-der and to ten years as a habitual violent felony offender along with ten years of probation. The district court stated in its decision that “[bjecause the [prison releas-ee reoffender] sentence is the longer of the two incarceration alternatives, it is the one that must be imposed.” Lewis, 751 So. 2d at 107 (footnote omitted). To the extent that this statement implies that dual sentences under the Act and another recidivist statute are never allowed, and to the extent that it implies that a sentence under the Act must always be the longest in duration of any sentence imposed, Gmnt is controlling. As we stated in Grant, “section 775.082(8)(c) only authorizes [a sentencing] court to deviate from the [Act’s] sentencing scheme to impose a greater sentence of incarceration.” Grant, 770 So. 2d at 659 (emphasis added). Therefore, the district court was correct in vacating the lesser sentence and we approve the result.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, and QUINCE, JJ., concur. . Section 775.082(8)(c), Florida Statutes. (1997), reads:
Nothing in this subsection shall prevent a court from imposing a greater sentence of incarceration as authorized by law, pursuant to s. 775.084 or any other provision of law.
Section 775.084(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1997), contains the language regarding habitual violent felony offenders.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sheffield v. State, 903 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…ng Sheffield’s relief as to this claim. As to Sheffield’s claim that his prison releasee reoffender sentence is longer than his habitual violent felony offender sentence, Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000), controls. See also Lewis v. State, 789 So. 2d 974 (Fla.2001) (affirming a trial court’s vacation of a shorter HFO portion of a sentence when it was combined with a longer PRR sentence). In [*1011] discussion of Sheffield’s Grant claim, the state’s response below argued that his prison releasee reof…
-
Daren J. Michel v. State, 935 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…s the longer of the two incarceration alternatives, it is the one that must be imposed.” Id. [*1230] The Supreme Court reviewed the Fifth District’s decision in Lewis I based on conflict with the Supreme Court’s decision in Grant See Lewis v. State, 789 So. 2d 974 (Fla.2001) (“Lems II”). The Supreme Court held that the Fifth District’s interpretation of subsection (8)(c) of the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act was contrary to the Supreme Court’s decision in Grant: To the extent that [the district’s ruling] imp…
-
Johnson v. State, 811 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. Although the trial court properly denied defendant’s Rule 3.800 motion on the grounds asserted by defendant, the state commendably raises a meritorious sentencing error. The state correctly concedes that Lewis v. State, 789 So. 2d 974 (Fla.2001), and Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000), mandate that defendant’s habitual violent offender sentence be vacated. We, therefore, vacate the habitual violent offender portion of defendant’s sentence. Sentence vacated, in part.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)
- Vashon Oland Lewis v. State, 751 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)