Scruggs v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Scruggs v. State

761 So. 2d 1265, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9009, 2000 WL 985765

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 19, 2000

DocketNo. 3D00-1180

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 761 So. 2d 1265 (Scruggs 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

Scruggs v. State, 761 So. 2d 1265, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9009, 2000 WL 985765 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Willie Scruggs appeals from the denial of his postconviction relief motion made pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Scruggs asserts that his sentencing under the “Gort Act” as a violent career criminal should be remanded for resentencing, following the Supreme Court’s holding in State v. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643 (Fla.1999) that chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida (1995)(the “Gort Act”) was unconstitutional as violative of the single-subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. The State agrees. Scruggs committed the offenses giving rise to the convictions on November 9, 1995, within the appropriate window period. See Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924 (Fla.2000)(applicable window for single-subject challenges is from October 1, 1995 through May 24, 1997). We affirm Scruggs’s convictions but reverse the order denying postconviction relief and remand the case for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time Scruggs committed the offenses. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643 (Fla.1999); Higgs v. State, 761 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

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

PER CURIAM.

Willie Scruggs appeals from the denial of his postconviction relief motion made pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Scruggs asserts that his sentencing under the “Gort Act” as a violent career criminal should be remanded for resentencing, following the Supreme Court’s holding in State v. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643 (Fla.1999) that chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida (1995)(the “Gort Act”) was unconstitutional as violative of the single-subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. The State agrees. Scruggs committed the offenses giving rise to the convictions on November 9, 1995, within the appropriate window period. See Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924 (Fla.2000)(applicable window for single-subject challenges is from October 1, 1995 through May 24, 1997). We affirm Scruggs’s convictions but reverse the order denying postconviction relief and remand the case for resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time Scruggs committed the offenses. Thompson, 750 So.2d 643 (Fla.1999); Higgs v. State, 761 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

761 So. 2d 1265, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 9009, 2000 WL 985765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scruggs-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack