State v. McMahon
Supreme Court of Florida
1ConcurrencePariente, J.
I write to briefly respond to Chief Justice Canady’s assertion that the plain language of section 924.07(l)(e) allows the State to appeal an error in the sentencing process. The plain language of the statute allows the State only to appeal a sentence on the ground that the sentence is illegal. The sentence in this case is not illegal, and there is no question that the trial court had the discretion to refuse to impose a habitual offender sentence.
Chief Justice Canady criticizes the majority’s narrow interpretation of the meaning of “illegal” sentence, which the Court has used to interpret…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Arizona v. ManypennySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Amend. to Fla. Rules of Appellate Proc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1996
- State v. CreightonSupreme Court of Florida · 1985
- State v. StoneDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010