ALON D. SIMS, 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.
Court affirmed denial of motion to correct illegal sentence, rejecting claims that a juvenile conviction was improperly used as a predicate for habitual violent felony offender enhancement and that Heggs relief applied.
A habitual violent felony offender sentence is not illegal merely because the defendant claims a juvenile conviction was used as a predicate, where the record shows an adult robbery conviction was the actual predicate.
[1] Heggs v. …
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 intelligenceAppellant was sentenced in 1996 as a habitual violent felony offender for kidnapping and aggravated battery with a firearm. He moved to correct the se…
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 Predicate Offenses cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, J.
We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion to correct an illegal sentence, in which he claimed that his 1996 habitual violent felony offender sentence for kidnapping and aggravated battery with a firearm was illegal. First, he alleged that the sentencing judge impermissibly used a juvenile or youthful offender conviction as a predicate offense for habitualization. The record does not support his contention that a juvenile conviction was used. Instead, the record reflects that the predicate offense for habitualization was a robbery conviction on which the state had direct-filed against appellant in the adult division. Second, appellant alleges that he is entitled to relief under Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000) (declaring the Crime Control Act of 1995 unconstitutional, invalidating the guidelines under that act, and permitting defendants sentenced thereunder to seek resentencing under prior guidelines). Because appellant was sentenced as a habitual offender, Heggs does not apply. See Arce v. State, 762 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Finally, appellant claims that he did not receive notice of the habitualization, but that claim too is refuted by the record and sentencing transcript.
Affirmed.
TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alon D. Sims v. State, 141 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…sen [*614] tenced to prison for that offense. That claim was raised in his August 2005 rule 3.800(a) motion, and was denied, see, e.g., Whitfield v. Singletary, 730 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), and the denial was affirmed on appeal. Sims v. State, 957 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), rev. denied, 977 So. 2d 577 (Fla.2008). Ground nine included a claim that there was no proof of the date of Sims’s release from prison for the predicate offense to establish that the instant offenses were committed within the f…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Arce v. State, 762 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)