Court Opinion

ID: 9898969
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-15 17:05:04.418135+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:30.914529
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                      Opinion filed November 15, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                            No. 3D22-1416
                     Lower Tribunal No. F96-22261A
                          ________________

                           Kenyatta A. Heath,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                         The State of Florida,
                                  Appellee.

     An appeal conducted pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Diana Vizcaino,
Judge.

     Kenyatta A. Heath, in proper person.

      Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Chief Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, HENDON and BOKOR, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
      Affirmed. See § 943.0435(12), Fla. Stat. (2023) (“The designation of a

person as a sexual offender is not a sentence or a punishment but is simply

the status of the offender which is the result of a conviction for having

committed certain crimes.”); State v. Brena, 278 So. 3d 850, 854-55 (Fla. 3d

DCA 2019) (“We observe that Mr. Brena's motion to delete the registration

requirement was not brought pursuant to either rule 3.800 or 3.850. Nor

could it properly be considered by the trial court as a rule 3.800(a) or 3.850

motion for it is well-settled that the sexual offender registration requirement

is not punishment and is not part of a sentence.”); State v. Whitt, 96 So. 3d

1125, 1126 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (affirming denial of defendant’s motion,

which sought the removal of his name from FDLE’s Sexual Offender

Registry, and holding: “Because the sexual offender designation was not part

of the plea or sentence, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to consider

this matter.”).

                                       2