Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Clines v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
912 So. 2d 550 (2005)


Facts

Michael Ray Clines (defendant) pled nolo contendere to the charges of grand theft and resisting arrest with violence. At Clines’s sentencing hearing, the state sought an enhanced penalty under Florida’s recidivist-sentencing statute. The state claimed that under the statute, Clines was both a habitual felony offender and a violent career criminal. These classifications determined the terms of punishment that could be imposed on Clines. For the charge of resisting arrest, the trial court sentenced Clines to (1) 10 years in prison as a habitual felony offender and (2) a mandatory minimum term of 10 years as a violent career criminal. Clines appealed on the ground that the application of multiple recidivist categories for the same conduct violated the prohibition on double jeopardy and defied the legislative intent of the recidivist-sentencing statute. The first district affirmed the sentencing and determined that the application of multiple categories did not violate double jeopardy or legislative intent. However, the first district certified a conflict to the Supreme Court of Florida, as the second district and fourth district had previously determined that the application of multiple categories was not permitted under the statute.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Cantero, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Wells, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.