Beaton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Beaton v. State

732 So. 2d 5, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4184, 1999 WL 174237

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 31, 1999

DocketNo. 98-2617

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 732 So. 2d 5 (Beaton 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

Beaton v. State, 732 So. 2d 5, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4184, 1999 WL 174237 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We grant appellant’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our decision of February 24, 1999, and issue the following opinion in its place.

[6]*6The 1996 version of Florida’s Sexual Predators Act, which the State sought to apply to Beaton approximately eighteen months subsequent to his sentencing, provides by its own terms that the community and public notification requirements are not applicable to those whose offenses were committed between October 1, 1998, and October 1, 1995 — the time frame relevant to this appeal. See § 775.21(4)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996); see also Collie v. State, 710 So.2d 1000, 1004 (Fla. 2d DCA) (“Presumably, the public notification provisions of section 775.225 do not apply to sexual predators whose current offenses were committed before October 1, 1995. This limitation, while not specifically stated, can be inferred from the language of section 775.22(S)(d), Florida Statutes (1995).”), review denied, 722 So.2d 192 (Fla.), cert. denied, 119 S.Ct. 624, 119 S.Ct. 624, 142 L.Ed.2d 563 (1998). Those portions of the trial court’s order referencing section 775.225’s notice requirements are ordered stricken.

DELL, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We grant appellant’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our decision of February 24, 1999, and issue the following opinion in its place.

[6]*6The 1996 version of Florida’s Sexual Predators Act, which the State sought to apply to Beaton approximately eighteen months subsequent to his sentencing, provides by its own terms that the community and public notification requirements are not applicable to those whose offenses were committed between October 1, 1998, and October 1, 1995 — the time frame relevant to this appeal. See § 775.21(4)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996); see also Collie v. State, 710 So.2d 1000, 1004 (Fla. 2d DCA) (“Presumably, the public notification provisions of section 775.225 do not apply to sexual predators whose current offenses were committed before October 1, 1995. This limitation, while not specifically stated, can be inferred from the language of section 775.22(S)(d), Florida Statutes (1995).”), review denied, 722 So.2d 192 (Fla.), cert. denied, 119 S.Ct. 624, 119 S.Ct. 624, 142 L.Ed.2d 563 (1998). Those portions of the trial court’s order referencing section 775.225’s notice requirements are ordered stricken.

DELL, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

732 So. 2d 5, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4184, 1999 WL 174237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beaton-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack