From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wade v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Feb 10, 1999
728 So. 2d 284 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Summary

holding that the Florida Sexual Predators Act does not apply to offenses occurring before October 1, 1993, the act's effective date

Summary of this case from Moore v. State

Opinion

No. 97-04121

Opinion filed February 10, 1999.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Dennis P. Maloney, Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Douglas Chanco, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ann Pfeiffer Howe, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


Following a violation of probation, Stuart Erving Wade was sentenced on three counts of sexual battery by a person under the age of eighteen on a child under the age of twelve. Wade appeals his designation as a sexual predator and claims error because his offenses were committed prior to the passage of the Florida Sexual Predators Act. We agree and reverse.

The amended information and judgment in the record reveal that Wade's offenses were committed in 1989 and 1990. The Florida Sexual Predators Act was first enacted in 1993 and took effect on October 1, 1993. See Ch. 93-277, § 6, at 2626, Laws of Fla. The criteria for sexual predator designation requires an offense committed on or after October 1, 1993. See § 775.23(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). Because Wade's offenses were committed prior to October 1, 1993, we conclude that he did not meet the criteria for a sexual predator designation.

The State does not dispute the factual accuracy of Wade's claim but asserts that Wade has failed to preserve this issue because he did not attack the designation by a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). However, a sexual predator designation is neither a sentence nor a punishment. See Burkett v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1630 (Fla. 2d DCA July 8, 1998), review denied, 719 So.2d 892 (Fla. 1998). Therefore, Wade would not be entitled to seek relief under rule 3.800. See Angell v. State, 712 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.800 and 3.850 are not available to challenge erroneous designation as sexual predator). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to strike Wade's designation as a sexual predator.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL, J., Concur.


Summaries of

Wade v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Feb 10, 1999
728 So. 2d 284 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

holding that the Florida Sexual Predators Act does not apply to offenses occurring before October 1, 1993, the act's effective date

Summary of this case from Moore v. State

holding that the Florida Sexual Predator Act does not apply to offenses occurring before October 1, 1993, the act's effective date

Summary of this case from Anderson v. State

In Wade v. State, 728 So.2d 284, 285 (Fla. 2D DCA 1999), the court found Rule 3.800 inapplicable, but nevertheless reversed the designation, apparently concluding that preservation was not required.

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

Wade v. State

Case Details

Full title:STUART ERVING WADE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Feb 10, 1999

Citations

728 So. 2d 284 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing Cases

Roberts v. State

As the State properly concedes, this was error. See Wade v. State, 728 So.2d 284, 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…

Nicholson v. State

In Angell, the court suggested the defendant file a civil declaratory action; in Coblentz and Smeltz, a…