Robinson v. State
Robinson v. State
Opinion of the Court
We have for review the decision in Robinson v. State, 742 So.2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), in which the Fifth District certified the same question which was eer-
We recently approved the First District’s decision in Woods, holding that the Prisoner Releasee Reoffender Act, as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act. See State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281, — So.2d -, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000). Accordingly, for the reasons oppressed in Cotton, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the Fifth District’s opinion with respect to that issue.
Robinson also challenges as illegal the concurrent, fifteen-year prison releas-ee reoffender sentence which the trial court imposed based on Robinson’s conviction for possession of cocaine. The applicable sentence appears to be five years. See § 775.082(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (1997) (providing five-year sentence for third-degree felony). This sentencing error is the type which may be raised for the first time on appeal
It is so ordered.
. As framed in Woods, that question is:
DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOF-FENDER PUNISHMENT ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION?
. It is unclear from the record whether this unpreserved error was raised before the district court, or for the first time before this Court.
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 <& SC95281, — So.2d —, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Steven ROBINSON v. STATE of Florida
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published