Bennett v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bennett v. State

495 So. 2d 239, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2049, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9810

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 25, 1986·No. No. 85-1768·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises a number of issues on appeal, only one of which merits discussion. Appellant argues that the application of section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985), in the present case is an impermissible ex post facto application of the statute, since appellant’s offenses were committed prior to July, 1985. Appellant is correct. See Williams v. State, 492 So.2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Yost v. State, 489 So.2d 131 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Thus, the application of section 27.3455 to the present sentence is reversed. The remainder of the sentence is affirmed.

REVERSED in part; AFFIRMED in part; REMANDED.

ORFINGER, COBB and SHARP, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises a number of issues on appeal, only one of which merits discussion. Appellant argues that the application of section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985), in the present case is an impermissible ex post facto application of the statute, since appellant’s offenses were committed prior to July, 1985. Appellant is correct. See Williams v. State, 492 So.2d 784 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Yost v. State, 489 So.2d 131 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Thus, the application of section 27.3455 to the present sentence is reversed. The remainder of the sentence is affirmed.

REVERSED in part; AFFIRMED in part; REMANDED.

ORFINGER, COBB and SHARP, JJ., concur.

Bennett v. State, 495 So. 2d 239, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2049, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9810 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

495 So. 2d 239 (Bennett v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related