Title: Jean Harrt Cazeau v. State of Florida
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC96-554
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: March 23, 2000

Supreme Court of Florida
 
____________
No. SC96554
____________
JEAN HARRT CAZEAU,
Petitioner,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
[March 23, 2000]
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Cazeau v. State, 740 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), in
which the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed Jean Harrt Cazeau’s violent
career criminal sentence based on its prior decision in Higgs v. State, 695 So. 2d
872 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).  In so affirming, the Cazeau court certified conflict with
the Second District Court of Appeal’s decision in Thompson v. State, 708 So.2d
315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).  We have jurisdiction.  See Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. 
Based on our decision in State v. Thompson, 25 Fla. L. Weekly S1 (Fla. Dec. 22,
1 We note that Cazeau has standing to raise a single subject rule challenge to chapter 95-
182, Laws of Florida, even assuming the window period for raising such a challenge closed on
October 1, 1996, as determined by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Salters v. State, 731 So.
2d 826, 826 (Fla. 4th DCA), review granted, No. 95,663 (Fla. Dec. 3, 1999).  Further, even
though Cazeau failed to raise a single subject rule challenge in the trial court, we find that such
challenge may be properly addressed in this case for the first time on appeal.  Cf. Heggs v. State,
25 Fla. L. Weekly S137, S138, S140 n.4 (Fla. Feb. 17, 2000); Nelson v. State, 24 Fla. L. Weekly
S250, S251 (Fla. May 27, 1999), cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 950 (2000); State v. Johnson, 616 So.
2d 1, 3-4 (Fla. 1993).
-2-
1999), in which we held unconstitutional chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, as
violative of the single subject rule, we quash the decision below and remand for
resentencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect on September 5, 1996, the
date on which Cazeau committed the underlying offense in this case.1  See
Thompson, 25 Fla. L. Weekly at S3 (remanding for resentencing in accordance with
the valid laws in effect at the time the defendant committed her offenses).
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ.,
concur.
WELLS, J., dissents.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF
FILED, DETERMINED.
Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Certified
Direct Conflict of Decisions
Third District - Case No. 3D99-61
( Dade County)
-3-
David M. Tarlow of Spencer & Klein, P.A., Miami, Florida,
for Petitioner
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Fredericka Sands, Assistant Attorney
General, Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
for Respondent