Fountain v. State

Dec 1, 1993
No. 92-3420
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Farmer
PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges an order denying her motion for post-conviction ‍​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍relief in which she claimed that her sentence was unlawful because she did not receive notice of the ‍​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍state’s intent to habitualize prior to her change of plea. We reverse and remand for the trial court to ‍​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍conduct a hearing as to whether the dual requirements of Ashley v. State, 614 So.2d 486 (Fla.1993), were complied with pri- or ‍​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍to appellant’s change of plea. If they were not, then appellant’s habitual offender *1120sentence is illegal and appellant must ‍​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍be sentenced within the guidelines.

WARNER, FARMER and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.