Supreme Court of Florida· 6/5/2008

State v. Collins

Citations

985 So. 2d 985
2008 WL 2277513

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing resentencing “as an entirely new proceeding [which] . . . should proceed de novo on all issues bearing on the proper sentence” (citation and internal quotations marks omitted)
explaining that allowing the state a second opportunity to prove qualification for HFO enhancement does not violate double jeopardy, and that as long as the sentence imposed at resentencing is not more severe there is no presumption of vindictiveness
“We have held . . . that a resentencing following a reversal on a sentencing issue does not implicate double jeopardy concerns.”
“Habitual offender sentencing is now separate from both the sentencing guidelines and sentencing under the Criminal Punishment Code.”
“[W]e hold that when a habitual offender sentence is reversed because of insufficient evidence, on remand for resentencing the State may again attempt to prove that the defendant meets the criteria for such sentencing.”
“A second attempt to prove the criteria for an enhanced sentence does not equate to ‘a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal.’ ” (quoting Lippman v. State, 633 So. 2d 1061, 1064 (Fla. 1994))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cantero

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

87 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.