Joe Nathan Duncan v. State Florida

Appellant appeals his enhanced sentences as an habitual felony offender, pursuant to section 775.084(1)(a)1, Florida Statutes
(Supp. 1988), following his convictions of burglary of a dwelling with assault and attempted sexual battery with the use of
great force. The trial judge classified appellant as an habitual offender based on two prior felony convictions which were
rendered on the same day in 1986. In light of the decision in Barnes v. State, 16 F.L.W. D562 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 22, 1991),
in which this court reaffirmed the long-standing view that habitualization must be supported by sequential convictions and
therefore cannot be based upon two convictions that occurred on the same day, classification of appellant as an habitual
offender was error. See also Razz v. State, 16 F.L.W. 852 (Fla. 1st DCA March 26, 1991) and Goodman v. State, 578 So.2d 11
(Fla. 1st DCA March 26, 1991). As in Barnes, we certify the following question as one of great public importance: Whether section 775.084(1)(a)1, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988), which defines habitual felony offenders as those who have
"previously been convicted of two or more felonies," requires that each of the felonies be committed after conviction for
the immediately previous offense.