Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

773 So. 2d 1240

Docket No. 3D00-2739.

Mullins v. State

Lawrence MULLINS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 13, 2000.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2000-12-13

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 2002

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“We realize that our decision here will require, among other things, the resentencing of a number of persons who were sentenced under the 1995 guidelines, as amended by chapter 95-184. However, only those persons adversely affected by the amendments made by chapter 95-184 may rely on our decision here to obtain relief. Stated another way, in the sentencing guidelines context, we determine that if a person's sentence imposed under the 1995 guidelines could have been imposed under the 1994 guidelines (without a departure), then that person shall not be entitled to relief under our decision here.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 794 So. 2d 731 - Foster v. State

Relies on Heggs v. State · Dunenas v. Moore

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-12-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Lawrence Mullins, in proper person.

¶2*1241 Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Fredericka Sands, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

¶3Before JORGENSON, COPE, and GODERICH, JJ.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5We grant the petition for belated appeal of the order denying postconviction relief to defendant-appellant Lawrence Mullins.

¶6On the merits, we affirm. Defendant entered into a plea bargain for an eight-year sentence, which was a downward departure from the 1995 guidelines. Those sentencing guidelines have since been held unconstitutional in Heggs v. State,759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000), and defendant falls within the window period created by that decision.

¶7Defendant concedes that under the 1994 version of the guidelines, the guidelines range is six to ten years, and his sentence falls within it. He argues that since he received a downward departure from the 1995 guidelines, logically he should receive comparable treatment under the 1994 guidelines, or at least a resentencing to the bottom of the 1994 guidelines range.

¶8This argument was rejected in Heggs itself. The Heggs court held "that if a person's sentence imposed under the 1995 guidelines could have been imposed under the 1994 guidelines (without a departure), then that person shall not be entitled to relief under our decision here." Id. at 627 (citations omitted); see Dunenas v. Moore,762 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). The order denying postconviction relief is affirmed.

¶9Belated appeal granted; affirmed.

/773/so2d/1240 · .json · Public domain