TIMOTHY A. HAMPTON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Sentencing precedents such as Blakely, Apprendi, and Alleyne do not apply retroactively to final sentences, and alleged defects in the information do not constitute sentencing errors subject to correction under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).
[1] Sentencing precedents establishing constitutional requirements for imposition of sentences, including Blakely 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 intelligence“Blakely does not apply retroactively to sentences or resentences that were final when it issued.”
Citation to State v. Johnson, 122 So. 3d 856, 866 (Fla. 2013)
Timothy A. Hampton appealed from a circuit court order denying his Rule 3.800(a) motion, which challenged his sentence in a case with a conviction fro…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.800(A) cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________ Case No. 5D2024-3157 LT Case No. 1998-CF-005532-A _____________________________ TIMOTHY A. HAMPTON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________ 3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Jonathan D. Sacks, Judge. Timothy A. Hampton, Graceville, pro se. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. June 27, 2025
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See State v. Johnson, 122 So. 3d 856, 866 (Fla. 2013) (“Blakely [v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004),] does not apply retroactively to sentences or resentences that were final when it issued.”); Hughes v. State, 901 So. 2d 837, 848 (Fla. 2005) (holding that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), does not apply retroactively); Jeanty v. Warden, FCI-Miami, 757 F. 3d 1283, 1285 (11th Cir. 2014) (concluding that Alleyne v. United
EDWARDS, C.J., and LAMBERT and BOATWRIGHT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000)
- Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (U.S. 2004)
- Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (U.S. 2013)
- Hughes v. State, 901 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 2005)
- Martinez v. State, 211 So. 3d 989 (Fla. 2017)
- State v. Sirron Johnson, 122 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 2013)