Background
Johnny M. Floyd Jr. appealed from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Leon County. The brief per curiam opinion does not describe his underlying offense or provide further details about the sentence imposed.
The appeal involved a sentencing claim under Apprendi v. New Jersey and Erlinger v. United States. The First District resolved the appeal by citing Shinault v. State, which addressed preservation of such a claim and whether designation as a violent felony offender of special concern requires jury findings.
The Court’s Holding
The First District affirmed. Relying on Shinault, the court indicated that a claim under Apprendi or Erlinger cannot be preserved through a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).
The cited precedent also held that, even if such a claim had been preserved during sentencing, designation as a violent felony offender of special concern does not require jury findings.
Key Takeaways
- An Apprendi or Erlinger claim cannot be preserved through a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion.
- A violent-felony-offender-of-special-concern designation does not require jury findings under the precedent the court applied.
- The First District affirmed without separately analyzing the facts of Floyd’s offense or sentence.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the First District’s position that defendants must preserve Apprendi- or Erlinger-based objections during sentencing rather than relying on a later Rule 3.800(b) motion.
It also confirms within the district that a violent-felony-offender-of-special-concern designation does not itself trigger a jury-finding requirement.