Brown v. State
The Fifth DCA reversed dismissal of a rule 3.800(a) motion challenging Habitual Felony Offender sentences on Apprendi/Blakely/Alleyne/Erlinger grounds. The court held that under Plott v. State, Apprendi-type challenges to HFO sentences are cognizable in a 3.800(a) motion, contrary to the postconviction court's view, and that the lower court's bare statement that Erlinger is non-retroactive was insufficient since Brown relied on the broader Apprendi line of cases, not Erlinger alone.
Key facts
- Brown challenged his Habitual Felony Offender sentences in a rule 3.800(a) motion, arguing that judicial fact-finding used to enhance his sentence violated Apprendi, Blakely, Alleyne, and Erlinger.
- The postconviction court dismissed Brown's motion, stating that Erlinger was not retroactive and therefore the challenge was barred.
- +1 more key fact with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion reaffirms that Apprendi-based challenges to HFO sentencing remain cognizable under rule 3.800(a) per Plott, a point some postconviction courts continue to resist. It also signals that summary dismissals… — 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.