RICHARD T. WRIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court erred in assessing court costs and a fine against a partially indigent defendant without the required findings.
Richard T. Wright appealed his judgment and sentence for lewd assault upon a child. The appeal challenged court costs, a payment to the Crimes Compens…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Crimes Compensation Trust Fund cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Richard T. Wright appeals his judgment and sentence for lewd assault upon a child. While we find no merit in appellant’s first three contentions, we agree that the trial court erred in assessing $2.00 in court costs and a $10.00 payment to the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund against Wright, who previously had been adjudged partially indigent. Brown v. State, 427 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
We also hold that the trial court erred in imposing a $10.00 fine against Wright under section 775.0835, Florida Statutes (1981). We note that the record contains no finding by the court that Wright has the present ability to pay this fine or that its imposition will not cause his dependents to be dependent upon public welfare. Section 775.0835 requires such a finding before this optional fine can be imposed.
Accordingly, we strike those portions of appellant’s judgment and sentence ordering payment of the $10.00 contribution to the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund, the $2.00 in court costs, and the $10.00 fine imposed. We affirm appellant’s conviction in all other respects.
OTT, C.J., and BOARDMAN and DAN-AHY, JJ., concur.