Ashford v. State
Ashford, sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender (PRR) under section 775.082(9), argued on appeal that Erlinger v. United States requires a jury—not the judge—to determine the facts underlying PRR status. The Fifth DCA declined to reach the merits of whether Erlinger affects Florida's PRR statute or caselaw, instead affirming on the ground that any such error would be harmless, citing its recent decision in Capra v. State.
Key facts
- Ashford was sentenced as a prison releasee reoffender (PRR) under section 775.082(9), with the trial judge determining the underlying facts for PRR designation.
- Ashford appealed arguing that Erlinger v. United States requires a jury—rather than a judge—to determine facts underlying PRR status.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion flags a live and unresolved issue—whether Erlinger requires jury fact-finding for PRR (and potentially other recidivist) sentencing enhancements under Florida law—that is currently pending before the… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.