Supreme Court of Florida· 5/3/2012

Dunbar v. State

Citations

89 So. 3d 901
37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 329
2012 WL 1559762
2012 Fla. LEXIS 884

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that double jeopardy is not violated when the trial court adds nondiscretionary mandatory minimum terms to a 4 State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1987
explaining that, because of the use of the word “shall” in section 775.087(2), a trial court has “no discretion . . . in deciding whether to impose mandatory minimum terms”
stating that a defendant’s sentence is subject to reversal on a well-taken State appeal
finding a trial court did not violate double jeopardy by adding “nondiscretionary” mandatory minimum sentence to the defendant’s written sentence
“[N]o discretion is given to trial courts in deciding whether to impose mandatory minimum terms under section 775.087(2) . . . .”
“One of the most basic tenets of Florida law is the requirement that all proceedings affecting life, liberty, or property must be conducted according to due process, which includes a reasonable opportunity to be heard.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Canady, Labarga, Lewis, Only, Pariente, Perry, Polston, Quince

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

52 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.