Background
John Michael Hulsaver appealed from the Circuit Court for Madison County, where Circuit Judge Mark E. Feagle presided.
The appeal involved a claim under Apprendi v. New Jersey or Erlinger v. United States. The First District’s brief opinion addressed whether such a claim could be preserved for appellate review through a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).
The Court’s Holding
The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s judgment in a per curiam opinion.
Citing Shinault v. State, the court held that an Apprendi or Erlinger claim cannot be preserved through a Rule 3.800(b) motion. The opinion provided no additional analysis.
Key Takeaways
- A Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion does not preserve a claim under Apprendi or Erlinger.
- The First District relied on its 2026 decision in Shinault v. State.
- The court affirmed without separately discussing the merits of Hulsaver’s constitutional claim.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the First District’s rule that defendants cannot rely on a Rule 3.800(b) motion to preserve Apprendi– or Erlinger-based sentencing issues. Counsel must therefore preserve such claims through an appropriate objection outside that post-sentencing procedure.