Hardman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hardman v. State

778 So. 2d 308, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 18044, 2000 WL 33239978

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 11, 2000·No. No. 2D97-601·Published

Opinion

THREADGILL, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant challenges a sentence imposed upon his conviction for burglary, in violation of section 810.02(4), Florida Statutes (1995), a third-degree felony. He was sentenced as a violent career criminal to fifteen years’ prison with a ten-year mandatory minimum term. The violent career criminal sentencing category was created in chapter 95-182, section 2, at 1665, Laws of Florida. In State v. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643, 649 (Fla.1999), the supreme court held that chapter 95-182 is unconstitutional as violative of the single subject ruled contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. The instant offense was committed between February 29 and March 1, 1996, within the window for challenge under Thompson. We therefore reverse the sentence imposed on the burglary offense and remand for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time the appellant committed the offense.

Reversed.

ALTENBERND and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

THREADGILL, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant challenges a sentence imposed upon his conviction for burglary, in violation of section 810.02(4), Florida Statutes (1995), a third-degree felony. He was sentenced as a violent career criminal to fifteen years’ prison with a ten-year mandatory minimum term. The violent career criminal sentencing category was created in chapter 95-182, section 2, at 1665, Laws of Florida. In State v. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643, 649 (Fla.1999), the supreme court held that chapter 95-182 is unconstitutional as violative of the single subject ruled contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. The instant offense was committed between February 29 and March 1, 1996, within the window for challenge under Thompson. We therefore reverse the sentence imposed on the burglary offense and remand for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time the appellant committed the offense.

Reversed.

ALTENBERND and BLUE, JJ., concur.

Hardman v. State, 778 So. 2d 308, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 18044, 2000 WL 33239978 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

778 So. 2d 308 (Hardman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related