Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Urruchurtu v. State

Urruchurtu v. State

858 So. 2d 387, 2003 WL 22494859
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 5, 2003·No. 3D03-1229·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

858 So.2d 387 (2003)

Alberto URRUCHURTU, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D03-1229.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

November 5, 2003.

Alberto Urruchurtu, in proper person.

*388 Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, SHEVIN, and WELLS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The order under review is affirmed. See § 893.135(1)(j), Fla. Stat. (2000). The defendant was charged with, and ultimately convicted of and sentenced for, a crime that he committed on June 20, 2001. That crime and the minimum mandatory sentence that it carried, were first created by chapter 2000-320, section 4, Laws of Florida, page 3497 and became effective October 1, 2000. This amendment was not part of chapter 99-188, Laws of Florida but added entirely new provisions to section 893.135 and thus was not affected by any infirmity in chapter 99-188, by the decision in Taylor v. State, 818 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), or by enactment of chapter 2002-212, Laws of Florida.

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

Urruchurtu v. State, 858 So. 2d 387, 2003 WL 22494859 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

858 So. 2d 387 (Urruchurtu v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gutierrez v. State
869 So. 2d 1262 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Cordova v. State
876 So. 2d 1 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Wright v. State
869 So. 2d 24 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Barber v. State
864 So. 2d 1171 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)