From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Capre v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Oct 20, 2000
773 So. 2d 92 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

In Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), this court stated, "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."

Summary of this case from Vickery v. State

Opinion

No. 5D00-502

Opinion Filed October 20, 2000 Rehearing Denied December 19, 2000 July Term 2000

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County, Frank N. Kaney, Judge.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Thomas J. Lukashow, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Belle B. Schumann, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.


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.


Summaries of

Capre v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Oct 20, 2000
773 So. 2d 92 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

In Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), this court stated, "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."

Summary of this case from Vickery v. State
Case details for

Capre v. State

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW DONALD CAPRE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Oct 20, 2000

Citations

773 So. 2d 92 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Vickery v. State

Id. at 97. In Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), this court stated, "Under Maddox, sentencing…

Perez v. State

PER CURIAM. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.800 (b); Capre v. State, 773 So.2d 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). PER…