TORI Q. LEE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2005-12-30
Nos. 1D04-5213, 1D04-5215
WEBSTER, BROWNING and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
917 So. 2d 376 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

Sentencing a defendant as both a habitual felony offender and a prison releasee reoffender for a single criminal act is improper under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery on a pregnant woman and sentenced to concurrent 15-year terms as both a habitual felony offender and a p…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

These consolidated appeals involve appellant’s criminal conviction for aggravated battery on a pregnant woman, No. 04-5213, and the revocation of appellant’s probation because of this crime, No. 04-5215. We affirm the revocation of probation without discussion. However, appellant’s challenge to the legality of his sentence has merit and we reverse as to that claim.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery on a pregnant woman and sentenced to 15 years as a prison releasee reoffender and as a habitual felony offender. As the State concedes, sentencing appellant to concurrent 15-year sentences as both a habitual felony offender and prison releasee reoffender, when only one criminal act has occurred, violates the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act. See Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655, 659 (Fla.2000); Lewis v. State, 819 So. 2d 1009, 1010 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to strike the portion of appellant’s sentence reflecting that he was adjudicated and sentenced as a habitual felony offender. Id.; Walls v. State, 765 So. 2d 733, 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Appellant’s 15-year sentence issued pursuant to the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act remains in effect and unchanged by this decision.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part and REMANDED with directions.

WEBSTER, BROWNING and POLSTON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dolansky v. State, 964 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
    …statute does not authorize sentence longer than life). Appellant’s sentence is REVERSED and REMANDED with directions to strike that portion of Appellant’s sentence reflecting his adjudication as an HFO. See Walls, 765 So. 2d at 734; Lee v. State, 917 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Morris v. State, 910 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Appellant’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED in all other respects. BENTON, HAWKES, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw