Capra v. State
Capra argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Erlinger v. United States overruled the Fifth DCA's Simmons decision, rendering his habitual violent felony offender (HVFO) sentence unconstitutional because a judge, not a jury, found the predicate facts. The Fifth DCA declined to resolve whether Erlinger overruled Simmons, instead affirming because any such Apprendi/Blakely-type error was harmless on the record.
Key facts
- Capra challenged his habitual violent felony offender (HVFO) sentence, arguing that a U.S. Supreme Court decision rendered it unconstitutional because a judge, rather than a jury, found the predicate facts supporting the enhancement.
- The trial court imposed an HVFO sentence based on judicial findings of prior convictions.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion signals how the Fifth DCA is handling the post-Erlinger wave of challenges to Florida's HVFO/HFO sentencing scheme, which relies on judicial fact-finding of prior convictions. Rather than deciding whether… — 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.