Home/Supreme Court of Florida/Wilkerson v. State

Wilkerson v. State

513 So. 2d 664, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 513
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedOctober 8, 1987
Docket68181
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 513 So. 2d 664 (Wilkerson 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
Wilkerson v. State, 513 So. 2d 664, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 513 (Fla. 1987).

Opinion

513 So.2d 664 (1987)

Terry Joe WILKERSON, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 68181.

Supreme Court of Florida.

October 8, 1987.

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, *665 Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Royall P. Terry, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This case is before us on remand from the United States Supreme Court following its decision on certiorari review of our earlier judgment.[*] In Wilkerson v. State, 494 So.2d 210 (Fla. 1986), this Court followed State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 1985), and held that Wilkerson should be sentenced pursuant to the guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing as opposed to the guidelines in effect at the time the crime was committed. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Miller v. Florida, ___ U.S. ___, 107 S.Ct. 2446, 96 L.Ed.2d 351 (1987), which held that utilizing the guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing violated the ex post facto clause of article I of the United States Constitution. Therefore, we vacate Wilkerson's sentence and remand the case to the circuit court with directions to resentence Wilkerson pursuant to the sentencing guidelines which were in effect at the time the offense was committed. We also recede from State v. Jackson to the extent that it conflicts with Miller v. Florida.

It is so ordered.

McDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[*] ___ U.S. ___, 107 S.Ct. 3206, 96 L.Ed.2d 693 (1987).

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

Related

Reginald L. Bryant v. State of Florida
148 So. 3d 1251 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2014)
Schneider v. State
788 So. 2d 1073 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
JJ v. Fryer
765 So. 2d 260 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Davis v. State
661 So. 2d 1193 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)
State v. Stone
617 So. 2d 355 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Salves v. State
592 So. 2d 378 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
State v. Buchanan
580 So. 2d 201 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
State v. Lyons
578 So. 2d 489 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Day v. State
573 So. 2d 1022 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Nixon v. State
572 So. 2d 1336 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
Miranda v. State
569 So. 2d 890 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Owens v. State
563 So. 2d 180 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Pope v. State
561 So. 2d 554 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
State v. Gavins
555 So. 2d 933 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Frierson v. State
550 So. 2d 1192 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Ferguson v. State
548 So. 2d 1183 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Stewart v. State
549 So. 2d 171 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
Weakley v. State
547 So. 2d 951 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Ellison v. State
545 So. 2d 480 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Pope v. State
542 So. 2d 423 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
513 So. 2d 664, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkerson-v-state-fla-1987.