STANFORD LAMAR, 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 mandatory minimum sentence imposed was illegal because it exceeded the statutory limit, but other challenges to the habitual offender sentence were not properly raised under the relevant rule.
Appellant challenged his habitual violent felony offender sentence for robbery, arguing the fifteen-year mandatory minimum exceeded the ten-year statu…
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 Habitual Violent Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Stanford LaMar, appeals a trial court order summarily denying his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). Appellant challenges his habitual violent felony offender sentence for robbery, a second degree felony, to the extent that it imposed a fifteen year mandatory minimum. The statute provides for a ten year mandatory minimum sentence. See § 775.084(4)(b)2, Fla. Stat. (1989). The state concedes that this portion of his sentence is illegal, and that the trial court erred in rejecting appellant’s challenge. We agree, and reverse and remand for resentencing on that ground.
However, we affirm the trial court’s rejection of grounds one and two, wherein appellant alleged that his habitual violent felony offender sentence was illegal as it was imposed without prior written notice of intent, to seek a sentencing enhancement, and because the trial coürt failed to show that a habitual offender sentencing enhancement was necessary for the protection of the public. These challenges are not properly raised under rule 3.800(a). See Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173 (Fla.2001); Cook v. State, 816 So. 2d 773, 774 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (citing Judge v. State, 596 So. 2d 73, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)).
While the trial court did not summarily deny these latter two claims for this reason, we affirm its denial of relief for the reason stated above. Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.
WARNER, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jacobs v. State, 162 So. 3d 29 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…tate, 895 So. 2d 1141, 1143 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). It is also well-settled that insufficient notice or even lack of notice of intent to seek enhanced penalties does not result in an “illegal sentence” that can be corrected at any time. LaMar v. State, 823 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Appellant’s relentless abuse of postconviction process interferes with this court’s ability to consider legitimate claims and damages the remedy for others. McCutcheon v. State, 44 So. 3d 156, 161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). Courts ha…
-
Rivera v. State, 903 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…3 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Collins v. State, 800 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Patterson v. State, 796 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Shaw v. State, 780 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Enriquez v. State, 885 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); LaMar v. State, 823 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). As this court did in Teal and McCall, we certify direct conflict with Richardson v. State, 884 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), review granted, No. SC04-174, 898 So. 2d 81, 2005 WL 937726 (Fla. Apr. 1, 2005). Affirmed; confli…
-
Iran Nathaniel Stevens v. State, 880 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See McCall v. State, 862 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Cook v. State, 816 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Wright v. State, 834 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); LaMar v. State, 823 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Middleton v. State, 721 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). As this court did in McCall, we certify direct conflict with Richardson v. State, — So. 2d -, 28 Fla. L. Weekly D1716 (Fla. 4th DCA July 23, 2003). Affirmed; conflict cert…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 2001)
- Judge v. State, 596 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Cook v. State, 816 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)