Wesley v. State
This text of 638 So. 2d 987 (Wesley 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.
Opinion
Walter Reese Wesley has appealed from an habitual violent felony offender sentence imposed after his plea of guilty to second-degree murder. We affirm.
Wesley first alleges that, despite the state’s notice of habitualfeation prior to entry of his plea, his sentence must be reversed in that the trial court did not personally confirm his knowledge of the “reasonable consequences” of the plea. See Ashley v. State, 614 So.2d 486 (Fla.1993). We affirm for the reasons set forth in Heatley v. State, 636 So.2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Wesley further alleges that he did not qualify for habitual violent felony offender classification, in that his prior offense of “rape”1 is not specifically enumerated as a qualifying felony in section 775.084(l)(b)l., Florida Statutes (1991). We reject this argument, in that the offense of “rape” is clearly encompassed by the current definition of “sexual battery,” an offense enumerated in the statute as a qualifying felony for habitual violent felony offender classification. See § 775.084(l)(b)l.b., Fla.Stat. (1991).
We affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
638 So. 2d 987, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5726, 1994 WL 256922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wesley-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.