From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniels v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 15, 1991
577 So. 2d 725 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Summary

In Daniels, we expressly rejected this argument and stated: "The subsequent addition of subsection (b) to section 775.021(4) was designed to overrule this Court's decision in Carawan v. State, 515 So.2d 161 (Fla. 1987), pertaining to consecutive sentences for separate offenses committed at the same time, and had nothing to do with minimum mandatory sentences."

Summary of this case from Hale v. State

Opinion

No. 90-746.

April 15, 1991.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County; William Arthur Wilkes, Judge.

Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender and James T. Miller, Asst. Public Defender, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and William A. Hatch, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.


Appellant Daniels asserts that the trial court erred: (1) in imposing three consecutive 15-year minimum mandatory sentences for offenses which arose from the same incident; (2) in denying his motions for judgment of aquittal; and (3) in permitting improper comments in the presence of the jury. We AFFIRM each of the three points raised but certify the following question, on the first point, as one of great public importance:

GIVEN THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT UNDERLYING CHAPTER 88-131, LAWS OF FLORIDA, AND THE COURT'S DECISIONS IN STATE V. ENMUND, 476 So.2d 165 (FLA. 1985), AND STATE V. BOATWRIGHT, 559 So.2d 210 (FLA. 1990), DOES A TRIAL JUDGE HAVE THE DISCRETION, UNDER SECTIONS 775.021(4) AND 775.084, FLORIDA STATUTES (SUPP. 1988), TO IMPOSE CONSECUTIVE LIFE TERMS, EACH WITH A FIFTEEN YEAR MINIMUM MANDATORY TERM OF INCARCERATION, FOR FIRST DEGREE FELONIES COMMITTED BY AN HABITUAL VIOLENT FELONY OFFENDER?

WIGGINTON, MINER and WOLF, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Daniels v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Apr 15, 1991
577 So. 2d 725 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

In Daniels, we expressly rejected this argument and stated: "The subsequent addition of subsection (b) to section 775.021(4) was designed to overrule this Court's decision in Carawan v. State, 515 So.2d 161 (Fla. 1987), pertaining to consecutive sentences for separate offenses committed at the same time, and had nothing to do with minimum mandatory sentences."

Summary of this case from Hale v. State

In Daniels v. State, 577 So.2d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), this court held that habitual mandatories may be imposed consecutively for offenses arising from the same incident.

Summary of this case from Taylor v. State
Case details for

Daniels v. State

Case Details

Full title:BERLIE DANIELS, JR., APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Apr 15, 1991

Citations

577 So. 2d 725 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

Taylor v. State

However, we must disagree with appellant's assertion that the minimum mandatory sentences imposed upon…

Hale v. State

Hale did not raise this issue before the district court because the law in the First District at the time…