Benedetto v. State
This text of 957 So. 2d 109 (Benedetto 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.
Opinion
Anthony K. BENEDETTO, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
*110 Anthony K. Benedetto, Lake City, pro se.
No appearance required for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court's denial of appellant's Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion. Appellant's habitual violent felony offender (HVFO) sentence was not affected by the amendments of Chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, which were found unconstitutional in State v. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643 (Fla.1999). Although appellant committed his offense within the window period established by Thompson, the trial court could have imposed the HVFO sentence in this case under the prior version of the statute without the amendments. Johnson v. State, 763 So.2d 283 (Fla.2000); Tiger v. State, 764 So.2d 824 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).
POLEN, TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
957 So. 2d 109, 2007 WL 1425750, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benedetto-v-state-fladistctapp-2007.