ELTON A. PURDY, 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.
Elton Purdy appeals his sentencing as a habitual felony offender, arguing that enhancing battery on a law enforcement officer to a felony and then applying habitual offender sentencing constitutes double jeopardy. The Florida appellate court affirms, holding that the legislature intended battery on a law enforcement officer to be treated as a felony qualifying offense under the habitual offender statute.
The court held that imposing a habitual felony offender sentence on a defendant convicted of battery on a law enforcement officer does not violate double jeopardy. The legislature intended battery on a law enforcement officer to be treated as a qualifying felony offense under the habitual offender statute.
[1] A conviction for battery on a law enforcement officer, a misdemeanor reclassified as a felony, may serve as a predicate offense for habitual felony offender sentencing.
[2] Sentencing a defendant as a habitual felony offender for battery on a law enforcement officer does not violate double jeopardy principles.
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“the Legislature has made the offense of battery, which is otherwise a misdemeanor, a third-degree felony when the victim is a law enforcement officer. See § 784.07(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998). In section 775.084, the Legislature has also authorized increased sentences for defendants who qualify as habitual felony offenders.”
Establishes the legislature's dual legislative scheme treating battery on law enforcement officers as felonies and authorizing habitual offender sentences
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePurdy was convicted of two counts of battery on a law enforcement officer, one count of resisting an officer with violence, and one count of resisting…
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 Felony Reclassification cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, C.J.
Elton A. Purdy appeals his sentencing under the habitual felony offender statute.1 We affirm.
Purdy was convicted of two counts of battery on a law enforcement officer,2 one count of resisting an officer with violence,3 and one count of resisting an officer without violence.4 Purdy was adjudicated a habitual offender and sentenced to ten years on each felony count. Purdy argues that the trial court improperly habitualized him for battery on a law enforcement officer because battery is a misdemeanor reclassified as a felony due to the victim being a law enforcement officer. Therefore, it is double jeopardy to enhance his sentence and then to sentence him as a repeat felony offender. Further, he argues that we incorrectly decided King v. State, 763 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), wherein this court held that it was the legislature’s intent to impose the harsher treatment on a person convicted of battery on a law enforcement officer and who meets the criteria for sentencing as a habitual felony offender. In Mills v. State, 822 So. 2d 1284 (Fla.2002), the Florida Supreme Court reviewed sections 784.07(2)(b) and 775.084, Florida Statutes, and stated:
[T]he Legislature has made the offense of battery, which is otherwise a misdemeanor, a third-degree felony when the victim is a law enforcement officer. See § 784.07(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998). In section 775.084, the Legislature has also authorized increased sentences for defendants who qualify as habitual felony offenders. Thus, the imposition on a qualifying defendant of one sentence under the habitual felony offender statute for the crime of battery on a law enforcement officer is proper, and not violative of double jeopardy. Indeed, if a conviction pursuant to section 784.07 were not treated as a qualifying offense under section 775.084, this would, in effect, nullify the clear legislative expression in intent to treat battery on a law enforcement officer as a felony.
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN and SAWAYA, JJ„ concur. . § 775.084, Florida Statutes (1999).
. § 784.07(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1999).
. § 843.01, Fla. Stat (1999).
. § 843.02, Fla. Stat. (1999).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ramirez v. State, 113 So. 3d 105 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…icer are both aggravated versions of simple battery). Section 784.07 identifies underlying crimes, including assault and battery, adds aggravating factors and enhances the penalties accordingly. See § 784.07(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2009); Purdy v. State, 844 So. 2d 758, 759 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (holding that battery on law enforcement officer is just battery reclassified by victim’s status); see also Knowles v. State, 65 So. 3d 597, 598-99 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (reasoning that because battery on law enforcement offic…
Authorities Cited
- Gayson Mills v. State, 822 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2002)
- King v. State, 763 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)