59 So. 3d 225
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Pifer pled in 18 cases in December 2005 and was adjudicated guilty and sentenced; appellate review affirmed.
- In February 2008, Pifer moved to correct illegal sentence; motion was denied and reversed on appeal, remanding for reconsideration.
- On remand, the postconviction court granted relief on the sentencing claim and resentenced Pifer by a successor judge who did not preside at the original plea.
- Pifer did not object to the successor judge presiding over resentencing; a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion challenging the resentencing was filed during the appeal.
- The trial court denied the 3.800(b)(2) motion; the issue on appeal is whether resentencing by a successor judge without a necessity showing constitutes a 3.800(b)(2) error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether resentencing by a successor judge without necessity is a 3.800(b)(2) sentencing error. | Pifer contends successor-presided resentencing violated 3.700(c)(1). | State argues the issue is preserved only for fundamental error if not objected at resentencing. | Not preserved as a 3.800(b)(2) error; if error, it is a sentencing-process error reviewed for fundamental error. |
| If error, whether the error constitutes fundamental due process violation. | Resentencing by successor judge without necessity undermines due process. | No fundamental error shown; no due process denial demonstrated. | No fundamental error established; affirmative preservation requirement not met and no due process denial shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. State, 983 So.2d 562 (Fla.2008) (defines scope of 3.800(b)(2) as limited to sentencing order errors, not sentencing-process errors)
- Hopkins v. State, 632 So.2d 1372 (Fla.1994) (requires fundamental error standard for unpreserved errors in some contexts)
- State v. Johnson, 616 So.2d 1 (Fla.1993) (defines fundamental error framework)
- Boyd v. State, 988 So.2d 1242 (Fla.2d DCA 2008) (discusses 3.800(b)(2) preservation in prior decisions)
- Kramer v. State, 970 So.2d 468 (Fla.2d DCA 2007) (addressed resentencing issues under rule 3.800(b)(2))
- Young v. State, 950 So.2d 516 (Fla.2d DCA 2007) (related to 3.800(b)(2) implications in resentencing)
- Lopez v. State, 905 So.2d 1045 (Fla.2d DCA 2005) (prior 3.800(b)(2) interpretations)
- Snyder v. State, 870 So.2d 140 (Fla.2d DCA 2004) (relevant to resentencing and 3.800(b) discussions)
- Persaud v. State, 821 So.2d 411 (Fla.2d DCA 2002) (earlier precedent on 3.800(b) considerations)
- Horne v. State, 918 So.2d 1011 (Fla.2d DCA 2006) (pertains to appellate review of 3.800(b) claims)