Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

744 So. 2d 545

Haynecz v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 20, 1999

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1999-10-20

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently June 2019

5 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1999-10-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The defendant appeals his guilty pleas and sentences for burglary and possession of burglary tools. We affirm in all respects, except we reverse the defendant’s sentences and remand for re-sentencing.

¶2The defendant asserts the trial court improperly enhanced his sentences under the Criminal Street Gang Prevention Act, section 874.04, Florida Statutes (1997). The Florida Supreme Court has recently declared section 874.04 violates substantive due process, thereby rendering it unconstitutional. See State v. O.C., Case No. 94,-513, — So.2d -, 1999 WL 731661 (Fla. Sept. 16, 1999). Because the trial court enhanced the defendant’s sentences pursuant to section 874.04, we reverse and remand for re-sentencing.

¶3AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

GUNTHER, FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.
/744/so2d/545 · .json · Public domain