LYSIRICK D. TAYLOR, 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.
Affirmed resentencing where successor judge adequately reviewed case materials and sentencing transcripts before imposing guidelines sentence, rejecting defendant's argument that judge failed to sufficiently acquaint himself with case facts.
A successor judge in a Heggs resentencing satisfies constitutional requirements by reviewing the court file, hearing victim statements, hearing from the defendant, and reviewing sentencing transcripts, without requiring a full statement of trial proceedings.
[1] A successor judge conducting Heggs resentencing satisfies due process by reviewing court files, hearing victim statements, hearing from the defendant, and reviewing sente…
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 intelligenceDefendant was convicted in 1997 of multiple offenses and sentenced to 386 months on the primary count and five years concurrently on another count. In…
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
GRIFFIN, J.
This is a Heggs1 resentencing case. The defendant went to trial and was convicted of a variety of offenses in 1997. On one of the more serious counts, he received a sentence of 386 months (32.2 years) in prison. On the remaining count, he was sentenced to five years running concurrently. In 2001, the appellant applied for and received Heggs relief. The successor judge announced that he had reviewed the court file a couple of times, twice heard the victim proffer, heard from appellant and had reviewed the sentencing transcripts. He concluded that the appellant should be sentenced to 300 months on Counts I-IV and to sixty months on count Y. Apparently recognizing that the trial judge was entitled to impose this guidelines sentence, the appellant’s complaint is that the trial judge failed to do enough to acquaint himself with the facts of the case before making the sentencing decision. Relying on a case out of the Third District Court of Appeal, Spencer v. State, 611 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), the appellant contends that the successor judge had a duty to receive a statement of the proceedings covering so much of the trial proceedings as the parties would contend would be relevant for the sentencing decision to be appropriately made. We see no error here. The trial court did what was required to appropriately resentence under Heggs.
AFFIRMED.
PLEUS, J., and COBB, W., Senior Judge, concur. . Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Spencer v. State, 611 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)