ROBERT F. MEDINA, 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.
The PRRP is constitutional, but whether it applies to burglary of an unoccupied dwelling must be reconsidered under the principles established in State v. Huggins.
[1] The Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act does not violate the single subject rule, separation of powers, prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishment, void-for-vague…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobert Medina was convicted and challenged the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act on two grounds: whether it applied to burglary of an unoccupi…
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 Unoccupied Dwelling cases and more on FLexlaw
QUINCE, J.
We have for review the decision in Medina v. State, 751 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), which certified conflict with the decision in State v. Huggins, 744 So. 2d 1215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), approved, 802 So. 2d 276 (Fla.2001). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. Robert Medina raises two issues before this Court. First, he argues the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act (PRRP) cannot be applied to the crime of burglary of an unoccupied dwelling. On this issue we vacate the decision of the Second District and remand for reconsideration upon application of our decision in State v. Huggins, 802 So. 2d 276 (Fla.2001).
The second issue involves various constitutional challenges to the PRRP;1 The Second District denied the constitutional challenges and held that all of these issues have been resolved, citing Grant v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), approved in part, quashed in part, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000). As to the constitutional challenges, we approve the decision of the Second District-based upon our decisions in Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla.2000), and State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000).
It is so ordered.
SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. LEWIS, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which WELLS, C.J., concurs.
. The various constitutional challenges are: the PRRP violates the single subject rule, violates separation of powers, is cruel and unusual, is void for vagueness, violates due process, violates equal protection, and is overbroad.
LEWIS, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I agree with the majority that the PRRP is constitutional. However, with respect to the question of whether burglary of a dwelling, whether occupied or not, qualifies the defendant for prison releasee reoffender' senténcing, I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion, and for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion of Chief Justice Wells, in State v. Huggins, 802 So. 2d 276 (Fla.2001).
WELLS, C.J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000)
- State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000)
- State v. Huggins, 802 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 2001)
- State v. Huggins, 744 So. 2d 1215 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Ames v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Grant v. State, 745 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Medina v. State, 751 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)