From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Salters v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 5, 1999
731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Summary

holding that only those persons who committed their criminal offense on or after October 1, 1995, but before October 1, 1996, had standing to challenge chapter 95-182 on single subject rule grounds

Summary of this case from Busby v. State

Opinion

No. 97-3234

Opinion filed May 5, 1999. JANUARY TERM 1999

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; William P. Dimitrouleas, Judge; L.T. No. 97-8300CF10A.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Marcy K. Allen, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Gentry Denise Benjamin, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


ON MOTION FOR REHEARING


We deny appellant's motion for rehearing. We withdraw this court's opinion issued on January 27, 1999, and substitute the following:

We affirm appellant's conviction for strong armed robbery. We also affirm appellant's sentence as a violent career criminal pursuant to section 775.084(c), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1996).See State v. Johnson, 616 So.2d 1, 2 (Fla. 1993);Scott v. State, 721 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). We hold that appellant's opportunity to challenge his sentence, based upon the constitutionality of the statute, ended on October 1, 1996. Consequently, appellant lacked standing to challenge this issue, since his offenses occurred on April 27, 1997. "Once reenacted as a portion of the Florida Statutes, a chapter law is no longer subject to challenge on the grounds that it violates the single subject requirement of Article III."Scott, 721 So.2d at 1246 (citing Johnson, 616 So. at 2).

We recognize and certify to the Supreme Court that our holding, as to the window of opportunity to challenge the statute, conflicts with Thompson v. State, 708 So.2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. granted, 717 So.2d 538 (Fla. 1998).

AFFIRMED.

STONE, C.J., DELL and STEVENSON, JJ. concur.


Summaries of

Salters v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 5, 1999
731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

holding that only those persons who committed their criminal offense on or after October 1, 1995, but before October 1, 1996, had standing to challenge chapter 95-182 on single subject rule grounds

Summary of this case from Busby v. State

holding that only those persons who committed their criminal offense on or after October 1, 1995, but before October 1, 1996, had standing to challenge Chapter 95-182 on single subject rule grounds

Summary of this case from Watson v. State

holding that only those persons who committed their criminal offense on or after October 1, 1995, but before October 1, 1996, had standing to challenge chapter 95-182 on single subject rule grounds

Summary of this case from Dixon v. State

holding that only those persons who committed their criminal offense on or after October 1, 1995, but before October 1, 1996, had standing to challenge chapter 95-182 on single subject rule grounds

Summary of this case from Johnson v. State

determining who has standing to challenge a violent career criminal sentence, enacted by chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, on the basis of violation of the single subject requirement

Summary of this case from Jones v. State

In Salters v. State, 731 So.2d 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), rev. granted, No. 95,663 (Fla. Dec. 3, 1999), this court held that only those persons who committed their criminal offenses on or after October 1, 1995 and before October 1, 1996, had standing to challenge Chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida on single subject rule grounds.

Summary of this case from McCarthy v. State

In Salters v. State, 731 So.2d 826 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. granted, No. 95,663 (Fla. Dec. 3, 1999), this court held that the window period for the single subject rule challenge closed on October 1, 1996.

Summary of this case from Busby v. State

In Salters v. State, 731 So.2d 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999),rev. granted, No. 95,663 (Fla. Dec. 3, 1999), this court held that the window period for the single subject rule challenge closed on October 1, 1996.

Summary of this case from Larivierre v. State

In Salters v. State, 731 So.2d 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), this court identified a different window period, holding that a defendant's opportunity to challenge his sentence as a violent career criminal ended on October 1, 1996, because Chapter 95-182 was reenacted on that date.

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

Salters v. State

Case Details

Full title:LEO SALTERS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: May 5, 1999

Citations

731 So. 2d 826 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing Cases

Williams v. State

Appellant also claims that his sentence as a violent career criminal violated the single subject requirement…

Webb v. State

Webb assumed that he was within the window period based on what I conclude is dicta in Thompson, which stated…