Fred Reuben Clarke v. State of Florida
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC00-305 ____________ FRED REUBEN CLARKE, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [February 8, 2001] LEWIS, J. We have for review the decision in Clarke v. State, 765 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), in which the First District certified the same question as in Woods v. State,1 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved sub nom. State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. 1 As framed in Woods, that question is: DOES THE PRISON RELEASEE REOFFENDER ACT, CODIFIED AS SECTION 775.082(8), FLORIDA STATUTES (1997), VIOLATE THE SEPARATION OF POWERS CLAUSE OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION? Clarke challenges his sentence under the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act2 ( the Act ) on several grounds, all of which have been addressed by previous opinions of this Court. See Grant v. State, 770 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2000) (rejecting an ex post facto challenge to the Act and holding that the Act violates neither the single subject rule for legislation nor principles of equal protection); State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000) (holding that the Act violates neither separation of powers nor principles of due process by allowing a victim veto that precludes application of the Act, as well as holding that the Act is not void for vagueness and does not constitute a form of cruel or unusual punishment). We also find Clarke s challenges to his sentencing as an habitual violent felony offender to be lacking in merit. See Herrington v. State, 643 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. 1994) (finding trial judge s failure to make findings of fact before subjecting defendant to sentencing under recidivist statute to be harmless error where record contained unrebutted evidence of defendant s prior convictions). Accordingly, the decision in Clarke is approved to the extent it is consistent with Grant and Cotton. It is so ordered. WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ, concur. 2 See § 775.082(8), Fla. Stat. (1997). -2- QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. QUINCE, J., dissenting. I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345, 358-59 (Fla. 2000). Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal Direct Conflict First District - Case No. 1D99-1035 (Bay County) Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Robert Friedman, Assistant Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, James W. Rogers, Tallahassee Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, and Giselle Lylen Rivera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Respondent -3- -4-
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.
