Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

440 So. 2d 603

Docket No. 82-2112.

Little v. State

Willie Lee LITTLE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 8, 1983.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1983-11-08

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1990

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“(1) As used in this act: (a) "Habitual felony offender” means a defendant for whom the court may impose an extended term of imprisonment, as provided in this section, if it finds that: 1. The defendant has: a. previously been convicted of a felony in this state; b. twice previously been convicted of a misdemeanor of the first degree in this state or of another qualified offense for which the defendant was convicted after the defendant's 18th birthday; 2. The felony for which the defendant is to be sentenced was committed within five years of the date of the conviction of the last prior felony, misdemeanor or other qualified offense of which he was convicted, or within five years of the defendant’s release, on parole or otherwise, from a prison sentence or other commitment imposed as a result of a prior conviction for a felony or other qualified offense, whichever is later; ****** (3) In a separate proceeding, the court shall determine if it is necessary for the protection of the public to sentence the defendant to an extended term as provided in subsection (4) and if the defendant is an habitual felony offender or an habitual misdemeanant. The procedure shall be as follows: ****** (d) Each of the findings required as the basis for such sentence shall be found to exist by a preponderance of the evidence and shall be appealable to the extent normally applicable to similar findings. ****** (4)(a) The court, in conformity with the procedure established in subsection (3) and upon ”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 472 So. 2d 553 - Johnson v. State

Relies on Cavallaro v. State · 435 So. 2d 940 - Brown v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1983-11-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Rory S. Stein, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and William P. Thomas, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3Before HENDRY, NESBITT and FERGUSON, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Willie Lee Little was convicted of burglary of a structure and grand theft in 1982. The evidence showed that he had been convicted of numerous other burglaries. He was sentenced as a habitual offender.

¶6Appellant seeks reversal of his sentences on the ground that the trial court erred in sentencing him as a habitual offender pursuant to section 775.084(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), since the court failed to specify the basis for sentencing him as a habitual offender and failed to find that the enhanced sentences were necessary for the protection of the public. We find merit in appellant's contention and reverse appellant's sentences as a habitual offender and remand for the trial court to make the specific finding required by section 775.084(3)(d), Florida Statutes (1981), that such sentencing is necessary for the protection of the public from further criminal activity by the appellant or, if the record fails to support such a finding, to vacate the habitual offender sentences. Brown v. State,435 So.2d 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (on rehearing); Cavallaro v. State,420 So.2d 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).

¶7Sentence reversed and remanded with directions.

/440/so2d/603 · .json · Public domain