ORLANDO LOPEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence. However, the portions of the trial court’s order requiring appellant to pay $10.00 pursuant to section 960.20 (Crimes Compensation Trust Fund), $10.00 pursuant to section 775.0835 (optional fine for the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund), $2.00 pursuant to section 943.25(4) (Law Enforcement Training and Correctional Officer Training Trust Fund), and courts costs in the amount of $102.00 are stricken since the trial court adjudged appellant insolvent prior to trial and appointed the public defender to represent him. Brown v. State, 427 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (question certified).
OTT, C.J., and DANAHY and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Welden, 483 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…cumstances such as this where the moving party’s allegations raise a colorable entitlement to rule 1.540(b)(3) relief, a formal evidentiary hearing on the motion, as well as permissible discovery prior to the hearing, is required. Rosenthal v. Ford, 443 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Pelekis v. Florida Keys Boys Club, 302 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 312 So. 2d 751 (Fla.1975); Stella v. Stella, 418 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). We have examined Southern Bell’s arguments and the record on t…
-
Dynasty Express Corp. v. Bernie T. Weiss, 675 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…Inc. v. Krathen, 471 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 484 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1986) (analyzing rule 1.540 motion directed toward judgment pursuant to offer of judgment, which was found to be analogous to a consent judgment); Rosenthal v. Ford, 443 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (analyzing as rule 1.540(b)(3) motion directed towards consent judgment, arguing that a party’s fraud and misrepresentation induced consent). By analogy,' a rule 1.530 motion for rehearing or new trial also would apply to a judgme…
-
In re Est. OF Gwendolyn Gaffney Willis v. Gaffney, 677 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)…. 2d 970, 973 n. 3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (“Courts now sanction less preciseness in the labeling of motions, looking more to their substance.”). Although not specifically relying on this legal concept, we recognized it implicitly in Rosenthal v. Ford, 443 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), a case strikingly similar to this one. In Rosenthal, we concluded that while appellant’s motions for relief from judgment based on fraud and misrepresentation of the appellee were styled “Motion for New Trial” and “Amended Motion…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 427 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)