Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MATTHEW DONALD CAPRE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

PLEUS, J.

Capre asserts he received an improper vindictive sentence of 42 months because he elected to go to trial rather than accept the state's pre-trial offer of a non-state prison sentence of 51 weeks in the county jail. He did not raise this issue below, nor did he avail himself of the remedy by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).

See, e.g., Willard v. State, 717 So.2d 631 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) ("It goes almost without saying that a judge may not impose a greater sentence on a defendant because such defendant avails himself of his constitutional right to trial").

Capre's trial took place in February of 2000, after the effective date of amended rule 3.800(b). See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2000) ; Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) and 3.800 and Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h), 9.140, and 9.600, 761 So.2d 1015 (Fla. 1999). Under Maddox, sentencing errors occurring after the effective date of amended rule 3.800(b), even fundamental ones, are barred if not raised at trial or in post-trial proceedings pursuant to rule 3.800. See Mancha v. State, 2000 WL 1299028, n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA September 15, 2000). Accordingly, appellant's appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

THOMPSON, C.J., and COBB, J., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CAPRE v. STATE
(Oct 20, 2000)