Turner v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Turner v. State

778 So. 2d 974, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 59, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 58, 2001 WL 62545

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJanuary 25, 2001

DocketNo. SC96631

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 778 So. 2d 974 (Turner v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Turner v. State, 778 So. 2d 974, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 59, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 58, 2001 WL 62545 (Fla. 2001).

Pincite

Opinions

LEWIS, J.

We have for review the decision in Turner v. State, 745 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District certified the same question that it had certified in Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved sub nom. State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345(Fla.2000).¹ We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

Turner challenges his sentence under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act² (“the Act”) on several grounds, all of which have been addressed by this Court in other opinions. See Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000) (rejecting an ex post facto challenge to the Act, and holding that the Act violates neither the single subject rule for legislation nor principles of equal protection); State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000) (holding that the Act violates neither separation of powers, nor principles of due process by allowing a “victim veto” that precludes application of the Act, as well as holding that the Act is not void for vagueness and does not constitute a form of cruel or unusual punishment). Accordingly, the decision in Turner is approved to the extent it is consistent with this Court’s opinions in Cotton and Grant.

It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.

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

LEWIS, J.

We have for review the decision in Turner v. State, 745 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District certified the same question that it had certified in Woods v. State, 740 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved sub nom. State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345(Fla.2000).¹ We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

Turner challenges his sentence under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act² (“the Act”) on several grounds, all of which have been addressed by this Court in other opinions. See Grant v. State, 770 So.2d 655 (Fla.2000) (rejecting an ex post facto challenge to the Act, and holding that the Act violates neither the single subject rule for legislation nor principles of equal protection); State v. Cotton, 769 So.2d 345 (Fla.2000) (holding that the Act violates neither separation of powers, nor principles of due process by allowing a “victim veto” that precludes application of the Act, as well as holding that the Act is not void for vagueness and does not constitute a form of cruel or unusual punishment). Accordingly, the decision in Turner is approved to the extent it is consistent with this Court’s opinions in Cotton and Grant.

It is so ordered.

WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

778 So. 2d 974, 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 59, 2001 Fla. LEXIS 58, 2001 WL 62545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-state-fla-2001.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack