Timothy A. Hampton v. State of Florida

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 27, 2025
Docket5D2024-3157
StatusPublished

This text of Timothy A. Hampton v. State of Florida (Timothy A. Hampton v. State of Florida) 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
Timothy A. Hampton v. State of Florida, (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

Case No. 5D2024-3157 LT Case No. 1998-CF-005532-A _____________________________

TIMOTHY A. HAMPTON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee. _____________________________

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Jonathan D. Sacks, Judge.

Timothy A. Hampton, Graceville, pro se.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Virginia Chester Harris, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

June 27, 2025

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See State v. Johnson, 122 So. 3d 856, 866 (Fla. 2013) (“Blakely [v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004),] does not apply retroactively to sentences or resentences that were final when it issued.”); Hughes v. State, 901 So. 2d 837, 848 (Fla. 2005) (holding that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), does not apply retroactively); Jeanty v. Warden, FCI-Miami, 757 F.3d 1283, 1285 (11th Cir. 2014) (concluding that Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), is not retroactively applicable on collateral review); Martinez v. State, 211 So. 3d 989, 991–92 (Fla. 2017) (holding that an alleged defect in the information that purportedly deprived the defendant of his due process right to notice of a potential enhanced sentence did not fall within the narrow class of sentencing errors subject to correction under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a)).

EDWARDS, C.J., and LAMBERT and BOATWRIGHT, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________

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

Related

Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Blakely v. Washington
542 U.S. 296 (Supreme Court, 2004)
Alleyne v. United States
133 S. Ct. 2151 (Supreme Court, 2013)
Hughes v. State
901 So. 2d 837 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2005)
Nicolas Francois Jeanty, Jr. v. Warden, FCI - Miami
757 F.3d 1283 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
Jose Martinez v. State of Florida
211 So. 3d 989 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2017)
State v. Johnson
122 So. 3d 856 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Timothy A. Hampton v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/timothy-a-hampton-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2025.