Does the Court Hold Chapter 95-182 Laws of Florida to Be Unconstitutional As Violative of the Single Subject Rule ?
In State v. Thompson, 750 So. 2d 643, 649 (Fla. 1999), we held chapter 95- 182, Laws of Florida, to be unconstitutional as violative of the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution.
Prior to announcing that holding, however, we noted the conflict between the Second District's decision in Thompson and the Fourth District's decision in Salters as to when the window period closed for persons claiming a violent career criminal sentence to be invalid due to the amendments made by chapter 95-182. See Thompson, 750 So. 2d at 646.
As noted in Thompson, see id., the Salters court apparently accepted an argument discussed by the Fourth District in Scott, in which the State argued that the Legislature's enactment of chapter 96-388, Laws of Florida, portions of which became effective on October 1, 1996, cured any alleged single subject rule problems in chapter 95-182. See Scott, 721 So. 2d at 1246 n.1.
The court declined to make a determination in Thompson regarding the close of the window period because the defendant in that case had standing to raise a single subject rule challenge even if the window period closed on October 1, 1996, as determined by the Fourth District in Salters. See Thompson, 750 So. 2d at 646.