Gadsen v. State

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT CHRISTOPHER GADSEN, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2D01-3638 Opinion filed October 19, 2001. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Richard A. Luce, Judge. WHATLEY, Acting Chief Judge. Christopher Gadsen challenges the order of the trial court denying his motion to correct sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm. Gadsen alleged in his motion that his habitual offender sentences are illegal because his youthful offender convictions could not be used as predicate offenses under the habitual offender statute. The trial court properly denied this claim. See Weford v. State, 784 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). In his motion, Gadsen stated that all his predicate convictions were youthful offender convictions and that he was "adjudicated and sentenced on the same day" in all of those cases. The attachments to the trial court's order support this statement. Gadsen was sentenced under a version of the habitual offender statute that required that the predicate convictions be sequential. See Markens v. State, 26 Fla. L. Weekly D2060 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 22, 2001). A claim that a habitual offender sentence is illegal because the required predicate convictions were not entered sequentially is cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. See id. However, Gadsen did not raise this claim in his motion, and the trial court did not address it. Our affirmance, therefore, is without prejudice to any right Gadsen might have to raise this claim in a subsequent facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion. Affirmed. CASANUEVA and STRINGER, JJ., Concur. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.