Balkcom v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Balkcom v. State

747 So. 2d 1056, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 87, 2000 WL 5929

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 7, 2000

DocketNo. 1D98-1227

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 747 So. 2d 1056 (Balkcom v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Balkcom v. State, 747 So. 2d 1056, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 87, 2000 WL 5929 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Paul Balkcom was convicted by a jury of burglary of a dwelling, battery on a law enforcement officer, and resisting an officer with violence. He was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment due to his designation as a prison releasee reoffender. He argues that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act, section 775.082, Florida Statutes (1997) (“Act”), is an unconstitutional violation of the Florida Constitution’s separation of powers clause and the single subject requirement. He further argues that his convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence violate double jeopardy prohibitions. This court has concluded that the Act does not violate the separation of powers clause or the single subject requirement. See Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 740 So.2d 529 (Fla.1999); Turner v. State, 745 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). This court and the Florida Supreme Court have determined that dual convictions of battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an [1057]*1057officer with violence do not violate double jeopardy principles. See State v. Henriquez, 485 So.2d 414 (Fla.1986); Larkins v. State, 476 So.2d 1883 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). We therefore affirm appellant’s convictions but, as in Woods, we certify the following question as one of great public importance:

DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOFFENDER PUNISHMENT ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION?

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS, MINER and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Paul Balkcom was convicted by a jury of burglary of a dwelling, battery on a law enforcement officer, and resisting an officer with violence. He was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment due to his designation as a prison releasee reoffender. He argues that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Punishment Act, section 775.082, Florida Statutes (1997) (“Act”), is an unconstitutional violation of the Florida Constitution’s separation of powers clause and the single subject requirement. He further argues that his convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence violate double jeopardy prohibitions. This court has concluded that the Act does not violate the separation of powers clause or the single subject requirement. See Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 740 So.2d 529 (Fla.1999); Turner v. State, 745 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). This court and the Florida Supreme Court have determined that dual convictions of battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an [1057]*1057officer with violence do not violate double jeopardy principles. See State v. Henriquez, 485 So.2d 414 (Fla.1986); Larkins v. State, 476 So.2d 1883 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). We therefore affirm appellant’s convictions but, as in Woods, we certify the following question as one of great public importance:

DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOFFENDER PUNISHMENT ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION?

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS, MINER and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

747 So. 2d 1056, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 87, 2000 WL 5929, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/balkcom-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack