Keene v. State
474 So. 2d 1199, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 403, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12332
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 12, 1985·No. No. AY-30·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
AFFIRMED. Jones v. State, 459 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Coates v. State, 458 So.2d 1219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Moore v. State, 455 So.2d 535 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Johnson v. State, 462 So.2d 49 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
We certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question as one of great public importance:
WHETHER A DEFENDANT’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF PROTECTION AGAINST EX POST FACTO LAWS IS VIOLATED WHEN HE AFFIRMATIVELY SELECTS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 921.001(4)(a), FLORIDA STATUTES (1983), TO BE SENTENCED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES BUT THERE IS NO SHOWING IN THE RECORD THAT THE COURT EXPLAINED THAT BY SELECTING GUIDELINES SENTENCING THE DEFENDANT WAIVES HIS ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Keene v. State, 474 So. 2d 1199, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 403, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12332 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).
474 So. 2d 1199 (Keene v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Department of Corrections v. Piccirillo
474 So. 2d 1199 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)