Whether the First District erred in deferring to the Circuit Court's finding that section 775.084 is not unconstitutional as applied to the facts of Mency's case and/or did the State courts properly address the merits of Mency's issue

QUESTION PRESENTED Mr. Mency contended Florida Statutes (2004) section 775.084(3)(a)6 was | unconstitutional under Apprendi_v. New Jersey and Blakey v. Washington as applied to his sentences because the statutory provision grants the trial judge the sole and exclusive authority to impose enhanced penalties beyond his offenses statutory maximum based on an additional findings of fact other than a prior conviction by a preponderance of the evidence instead of upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury that Mency posed a danger to the public. The Circuit Court denied relief relying on Almendarez-Torres which addressed the recidivist . exception and the First District Court of Appeals relied upon that case to uphold the denial. oe Did the First District err in deferring to the Circuit Court’s finding that section 775.084 is not unconstitutional as applied to the facts of Mency’s case and/or did the State courts properly address the merits of Mency’s issue? ii