Steed v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Steed v. State

761 So. 2d 490, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8252, 2000 WL 873196

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 5, 2000

DocketNo. 3D99-2008

StatusPublished

This text of 761 So. 2d 490 (Steed 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

Steed v. State, 761 So. 2d 490, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8252, 2000 WL 873196 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no merit to the appellant’s argument that his plea agreement with the state should be voided as against public policy and therefore affirm his convictions for trafficking in cocaine. However, in the wake of the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000); which held Chapter 95-184, enacting the 1995 sentencing guidelines under which the appellant was sentenced, to be unconstitutional; and because appellant’s crime was committed during the operative window period; we must vacate the appellant’s sentence and remand for resentenc-ing under the guidelines which were in effect prior to the enactment of Chapter 95-184. See Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924 (Fla.2000); Diaz v. State, 752 So.2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). See also Llinas-Flores v. State, 755 So.2d 188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Paz v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly D824, - So.2d -, 2000 WL 313567 (Fla. 3d DCA March 29, 2000).

Affirmed in part. Reversed and remanded in part with directions.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find no merit to the appellant’s argument that his plea agreement with the state should be voided as against public policy and therefore affirm his convictions for trafficking in cocaine. However, in the wake of the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000); which held Chapter 95-184, enacting the 1995 sentencing guidelines under which the appellant was sentenced, to be unconstitutional; and because appellant’s crime was committed during the operative window period; we must vacate the appellant’s sentence and remand for resentenc-ing under the guidelines which were in effect prior to the enactment of Chapter 95-184. See Trapp v. State, 760 So.2d 924 (Fla.2000); Diaz v. State, 752 So.2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). See also Llinas-Flores v. State, 755 So.2d 188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Paz v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly D824, - So.2d -, 2000 WL 313567 (Fla. 3d DCA March 29, 2000).

Affirmed in part. Reversed and remanded in part with directions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

761 So. 2d 490, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8252, 2000 WL 873196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steed-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack