Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Terry Dewayne Gideon v. State of Florida, 13-4173 (2014)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 13-4173 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jul. 30, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA TERRY DEWAYNE GIDEON, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. CASE NO. 1D13-4173 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _/ Opinion filed July 21, 2014. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County. J. Scott Duncan, Judge. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Megan Long, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Samuel B.
More
                                    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                                    FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

TERRY DEWAYNE GIDEON,               NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
                                    FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
      Appellant,                    DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

v.                                  CASE NO. 1D13-4173

STATE OF FLORIDA,

      Appellee.

_____________________________/

Opinion filed July 21, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.
J. Scott Duncan, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Megan Long, Assistant Public Defender,
Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Samuel B. Steinberg and Jay Kubica,
Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.




PER CURIAM.

      Terry Dewayne Gideon challenges his designation as a Prison Releasee

Reoffender (PRR) and the resulting mandatory minimum sentence. We reject
Gideon’s argument that eligibility for PRR sentencing is a fact which must be

submitted to the jury. See Williams v. State, --- So. 3d ---, 39 Fla. L. Weekly

D1336 (Fla. 1st DCA June 25, 2014), and Lopez v. State, 
135 So. 3d 539
(Fla. 2d

DCA 2014). As for the argument that eligibility for PRR sentencing is an element

which must be alleged in the charging document, we find this argument to be

without merit. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
, 
118 S. Ct. 1219
, 
140 L. Ed. 2d 350
(1998).

      AFFIRMED.

VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO, and MARSTILLER, JJ., CONCUR.




                                         2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer