Clines v. State

912 So. 2d 550 (2005)

Facts

D was charged with resisting arrest with violence, grand theft, and two counts of battery on a law enforcement officer. P filed notices to seek both habitual felony offender sentencing and violent career criminal sentencing.  D later pled nolo contendere to the resisting arrest and grand theft charges, while P dropped the two counts of battery on a law enforcement officer. At sentencing, P introduced evidence showing that D qualified as a habitual felony offender and a violent career criminal. The trial court applied both designations. Having designated D a habitual felony offender, the court sentenced him to ten years in prison and having designated him a violent career criminal; the court imposed a ten-year mandatory minimum term. D filed a motion arguing that he could not be designated as both a habitual felony offender and a violent career criminal. The trial court denied the motion as facially insufficient. D appealed. D argued that his dual designation violated double jeopardy protections and conflicted with the Legislature's intent. The court affirmed but certified the question to the Supreme Court of Florida.