JACEK ROBERT ZATYKA, 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.
Jacek Zatyka challenged his mandatory minimum three-year sentence for trafficking in phenethylamines as illegal under a prior case holding. The court affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition, finding that the mandatory minimum statute was constitutional and the prior case upon which he relied did not apply to his offense.
The mandatory minimum sentence is legal and constitutional. The court's prior holding in Taylor v. State, which found certain statutory changes unconstitutional under the single subject rule, does not apply to Zatyka's offense because that offense was enacted under a different statute not subject to the Taylor holding.
[1] A mandatory minimum sentence for trafficking in MDMA is not rendered illegal by a ruling that a prior statute imposing mandatory minimums for certain drug offenses was un…
[2] The unconstitutionality of Chapter 99-188, Laws of Florida, due to a single-subject rule violation, does not affect mandatory minimum sentences imposed for offenses creat…
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“It is well settled that a petition for a writ of habeas corpus may not be used as a substitute for an appropriate postconviction motion.”
Establishes the general principle governing when habeas corpus petitions are proper.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceZatyka was convicted of trafficking in phenethylamines and sentenced to a mandatory minimum of three years in prison under Florida Statutes section 89…
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 Single Subject Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
[*286] NORTHCUTT, Judge.
Jacek Robert Zatyka appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging as an illegal sentence a mandatory minimum of three years in prison provided for by section 893.135(l)(k), Florida Statutes (2001), and imposed as part of a sentence for his conviction of trafficking in phenethylamines. Because the mandatory minimum sentence is legal, we affirm.
It is well settled that a petition for a writ of habeas corpus may not be used as a substitute for an appropriate postconviction motion. See Harris v. State, 789 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Since Zatyka claims that the imposed mandatory minimum is an illegal sentence pursuant to this court’s opinion in Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), review dismissed, 821 So. 2d 302 (Fla.2002), his petition will be treated as a motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).
Even though Zatyka committed his offense in January 2002 (within the Taylor window period of July 1, 1999, to April 29, 2002), the Taylor case is inapplicable to Zatyka’s claim for relief. In Taylor, this court held that the statutory changes contained in chapter 99-188, Laws of Florida, were unconstitutional because the enactment of chapter 99-188 violated the single subject rule contained in Florida’s constitution. However, the offense of trafficking in phenethylamines and its mandatory minimum sentences were initially enacted into law by chapter 2000-320, Laws of Florida, which became effective October 1, 2000. Therefore, the holding of Taylor does not apply.
Zatyka cites Staley v. State, 860 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), as supporting his position. This court in Wright v. State, 869 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (en banc), has receded from Staley to the extent that Staley holds that a defendant convicted of trafficking in phenethylamines and sentenced to a mandatory minimum sentence is entitled to relief under Taylor. Because the mandatory minimum sentence imposed on Zatyka is a legal sentence, we affirm the order of the circuit court denying Zatyka’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
Affirmed.
CASANUEVA and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brinson v. State, 995 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…on as a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion, the postconviction court dismissed it after concluding it did not have jurisdiction because Brinson was not within the court’s territorial jurisdiction. This was error. See Zatyka v. State, 872 So. 2d 285, 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (holding that a petition for writ of habeas corpus that raises a claim of illegal sentence should be treated as a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a)); Walker v. State, 965 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (reversing the den…
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Barnard v. State, 789 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Wright v. State, 869 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Staley v. State, 860 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)