Boardman v. State
2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14229
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Boardman appealed a 3.800(a) motion seeking correction of an illegal sentence after resentencing on Heggs grounds.
- In 1998 Boardman pled nolo contendere to multiple counts of sexual activity with a child and received negotiated 39-year terms; direct appeal affirmed.
- Boardman subsequently obtained postconviction relief under Heggs; trial court resentenced him in 2001 with an upward-departure based on escalating offenses, though total imprisonment did not increase.
- He challenged the resentencing under Apprendi and Blakely, arguing the judge, not the jury, made factual determinations used to depart upward.
- The trial court denied relief; the appellate court stayed proceedings pending Fleming's resolution of retroactivity and ultimately affirmed denial.
- The Florida Supreme Court in Fleming held the rules apply to de novo resentencings not final when Apprendi/Blakely issued; Boardman’s sentences were final before Blakely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Apprendi applies to Boardman’s resentencing where the sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum | Boardman | State | No Apprendi relief; sentences did not exceed statutory maximum |
| Whether Blakely retroactively applies to Boardman’s case | Boardman | State | Blakely does not apply because sentences final before its issuance |
| Whether Fleming governs retroactivity and finality in this de novo resentencing | Boardman | State | Fleming controls; Apprendi/Blakely apply only to de novo resentencings not final when issued |
Key Cases Cited
- Fleming v. State, 61 So.3d 399 (Fla.2011) (retroactivity of Apprendi/Blakely in de novo resentencings)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000) (requires jury findings for facts increasing punishment beyond statutory maximum)
- Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (U.S. 2004) (clarifies statutory maximum and jury-found facts standard)
- Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000) (postconviction relief framework for illegal sentence claims)
- Caraballo v. State, 805 So.2d 882 (Fla.2001) (Apprendi analysis focuses on statutory maximum, not guidelines range)
- McCloud v. State, 803 So.2d 821 (Fla.5th DCA 2001) (relevance of statutory maximum for Apprendi purposes)