Gideon v. State

145 So. 3d 892, 2014 WL 3566538, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 11235
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 21, 2014·No. No. 1D13-1173·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Terry Dewayne Gideon challenges his designation as a Prison Releasee Reoffen-der (PRR) and the resulting mandatory minimum sentence. We reject Gideon’s argument that eligibility for PRR sentencing is a fact which must be submitted to the jury. See Williams v. State, 143 So.3d 423 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), and Lopez v. State, 135 So.3d 539 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). As for the argument that eligibility for PRR sentencing is an element which must be alleged in the charging document, we find this argument to be without merit. See Almendarez-Toms v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998).

AFFIRMED.

VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.

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

Gideon v. State, 145 So. 3d 892, 2014 WL 3566538, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 11235 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

145 So. 3d 892 (Gideon v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Washington v. State
152 So. 3d 1282 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
Benjamin Washington v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015
Hughes v. State
150 So. 3d 287 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Brown v. State
143 So. 3d 493 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Willard G. Brown v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014