Santiago v. State
76 So. 3d 1027
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Santiago was convicted of burglary of a conveyance with an assault or battery under Fla. Stat. § 810.02(2)(a).
- The State sought to designate him a prison releasee reoffender (PRR) under Fla. Stat. § 775.082(9)(a).
- Trial court found Santiago qualified as PRR and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
- Santiago challenged, arguing burglary of a conveyance with an assault or battery is not a qualifying offense under PRR.
- Court applied Perkins/Hearns statutory-elements approach to determine if the offense involves the use or threat of force or violence.
- Court concluded the offense does not necessarily involve force or violence because it can be proven by mere touching, vacated the sentence, and remanded for a new sentencing hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does burglary of a conveyance with an assault or battery qualify under PRR catchall? | Santiago: offense lacks necessary force element. | State: catchall includes any felony involving force or violence. | Offense cannot qualify under PRR catchall. |
| What test governs whether an offense qualifies under catchall? | Apply statutory elements test per Perkins/Hearns. | State argues proof at trial suffices for catchall. | Use statutory elements test; examine elements alone. |
| What is the remedy when PRR designation is improper? | Sentence should be corrected or vacated. | Not specified; PRR valid if elements test satisfied. | Vacate sentence and remand for new sentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Perkins v. State, 576 So.2d 1310 (Fla. 1991) (elements test: forcible felonies require the statutory elements to involve force)
- State v. Hearns, 961 So.2d 211 (Fla. 2007) (applies Perkins elements test to VCC; look only at statutory elements)
- Gorham v. State, 988 So.2d 152 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (applies Hearns to PRR-like context for burglary of conveyance with assault or battery)
- Tumblin v. State, 965 So.2d 354 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (per Hearns, use statutory elements test for forcible felony analysis)
- Shaw v. State, 26 So.3d 51 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (distinguishable; involved offense where assault element required)
- Johnson v. State, 858 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (mere touching can constitute battery on officer but not forcible felony under VCC)
- Acosta v. State, 982 So.2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (BOLEO analysis aligned with Perkins/Hearns elements approach)