Delprete v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Delprete v. State

873 So. 2d 450, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 6269, 2004 WL 950237

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 5, 2004

DocketNo. 4D03-277

StatusPublished

This text of 873 So. 2d 450 (Delprete 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

Delprete v. State, 873 So. 2d 450, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 6269, 2004 WL 950237 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael Delprete pled no contest to March 2001 charges of trafficking in oxy-codone and unlawfully filling a prescription. With respect to the trafficking charge, Delprete was sentenced to fifteen years incarceration with a three-year mandatory minimum. On appeal, as he did below, Delprete contends that the imposition of the three-year mandatory minimum for the 2001 trafficking offense is unconstitutional because (1) the 1999 legislation authorizing the mandatory minimum¹ violated the single subject rule and (2) any retroactive application of the 2002 legislative re-enactment of the mandatory minimum ² violates the ex post facto clause. In Hernandez-Molina v. State, 860 So.2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)(en banc), decided subsequent to the filing of Delprete’s initial brief, this court held that the legislation authorizing the mandatory minimum was not enacted in violation of the single subject rule. See also Pitts v. State, 855 So.2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); State v. Franklin, 836 So.2d 1112 (Fla. 3d DCA), review granted, 854 So.2d 659 (Fla.2003). Thus, we affirm Delprete’s sentence. As we did in Hernandez-Molina, however, we certify conflict with the Second District’s decision in Taylor v. State, 818 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 821 So.2d 302 (Fla.2002).

STONE, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Michael Delprete pled no contest to March 2001 charges of trafficking in oxy-codone and unlawfully filling a prescription. With respect to the trafficking charge, Delprete was sentenced to fifteen years incarceration with a three-year mandatory minimum. On appeal, as he did below, Delprete contends that the imposition of the three-year mandatory minimum for the 2001 trafficking offense is unconstitutional because (1) the 1999 legislation authorizing the mandatory minimum¹ violated the single subject rule and (2) any retroactive application of the 2002 legislative re-enactment of the mandatory minimum ² violates the ex post facto clause. In Hernandez-Molina v. State, 860 So.2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)(en banc), decided subsequent to the filing of Delprete’s initial brief, this court held that the legislation authorizing the mandatory minimum was not enacted in violation of the single subject rule. See also Pitts v. State, 855 So.2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); State v. Franklin, 836 So.2d 1112 (Fla. 3d DCA), review granted, 854 So.2d 659 (Fla.2003). Thus, we affirm Delprete’s sentence. As we did in Hernandez-Molina, however, we certify conflict with the Second District’s decision in Taylor v. State, 818 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 821 So.2d 302 (Fla.2002).

STONE, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

873 So. 2d 450, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 6269, 2004 WL 950237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delprete-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack