FLOWERS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2025-12-17
No. 2024-0818
Everett, J., Bilbrey, J., Kelsey, J., Nordby, J.
2025 FL 11948 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2025)

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

Any error in having the judge rather than the jury make findings of fact establishing a prison releasee reoffender enhancement is harmless error.


Headnotes

[1] Any error in having the trial judge rather than the jury make findings of fact establishing a prison releasee reoffender enhancement is harmless error.

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

Facts & Procedural History

Booker Flowers was convicted and sentenced with a prison releasee reoffender enhancement. On appeal, he challenged the enhancement on the ground that …

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.


Per_curiam
Per Curiam

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2024-0818 _____________________________

BOOKER FLOWERS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee. _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. Stephen S. Everett, Judge.

December 17, 2025

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises two issues on direct appeal from his judgment and sentence. We affirm as to the first issue without comment.

We also affirm as to the second issue, in which he argues that he must be resentenced without a prison releasee reoffender enhancement because the judge rather than the jury made the underlying findings of fact establishing he was subject to the enhancement. This argument is meritless because any error was harmless. See Sheffield v. State, No.1D2024-1587, 2025 WL 3288602, at *1 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 26, 2025) (affirming PRR sentence without deciding the impact, if any, of Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024), because any error was harmless);

AFFIRMED.

BILBREY, KELSEY, and NORDBY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Ross Scott Haine, II, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Miranda Lee Butson, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Footnotes
2 Hicks v. State, No. 1D2024-1300, 2025 WL 2921590 (Fla. 1st DCA Oct. 15, 2025) (same); Alonso v. State, 415 So. 3d 826, 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2025) (same); Ashford v. State, 407 So. 3d 537, 537 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025) (same).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw