Contreras v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Contreras v. State

749 So. 2d 524, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16919, 1999 WL 1203827

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 17, 1999

DocketNo. 99-00737

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 749 So. 2d 524 (Contreras 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

Contreras v. State, 749 So. 2d 524, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16919, 1999 WL 1203827 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

FULMER, Judge.

Eduardo Contreras, Jr. appeals his sentence for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, arguing that utilizing a scoresheet which calculated points for prior record offenses based on the sentencing guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing is an ex post facto violation. He asserts that the trial court should have assessed prior record points based on the guidelines in effect at the time he committed the prior offenses. We affirm.

The trial court properly utilized a scoresheet which included points for prior record offenses based on the guidelines in effect at the time Contreras committed the aggravated assault for which he was being sentenced. See § 921.001(4)(b)2, Fla. Stat. (1997). Applying these guidelines did not increase the punishment from what the penalty was at the time Contreras committed that offense. “To fall within the ex post facto prohibition, a law must be retrospective — that is ‘it must apply to events occurring before its enactment’ — and it ‘must disadvantage the offender affected by it’ ... by altering the definition of criminal conduct or increasing the punishment for the crime.” Lynce v. Mathis, 519 U.S. 433, 441, 117 S.Ct. 891, 137 L.Ed.2d 63 (1997) (citations omitted). Applying this principle, we conclude there was no ex post facto violation here.

Affirmed.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SALCINES, J., Concur.

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

FULMER, Judge.

Eduardo Contreras, Jr. appeals his sentence for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, arguing that utilizing a scoresheet which calculated points for prior record offenses based on the sentencing guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing is an ex post facto violation. He asserts that the trial court should have assessed prior record points based on the guidelines in effect at the time he committed the prior offenses. We affirm.

The trial court properly utilized a scoresheet which included points for prior record offenses based on the guidelines in effect at the time Contreras committed the aggravated assault for which he was being sentenced. See § 921.001(4)(b)2, Fla. Stat. (1997). Applying these guidelines did not increase the punishment from what the penalty was at the time Contreras committed that offense. “To fall within the ex post facto prohibition, a law must be retrospective — that is ‘it must apply to events occurring before its enactment’ — and it ‘must disadvantage the offender affected by it’ ... by altering the definition of criminal conduct or increasing the punishment for the crime.” Lynce v. Mathis, 519 U.S. 433, 441, 117 S.Ct. 891, 137 L.Ed.2d 63 (1997) (citations omitted). Applying this principle, we conclude there was no ex post facto violation here.

Affirmed.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SALCINES, J., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

749 So. 2d 524, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16919, 1999 WL 1203827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/contreras-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack