STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
WILLIE BROWN, RESPONDENT
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 appellate court held that a prior adjudication of insolvency prohibits the assessment of court costs against the defendant, including standard court costs and specific statutory costs for crime compensation and training funds.
The court held that the prior adjudication of insolvency prohibited the assessment of all costs against the defendant, striking both the standard court costs and the statutory costs.
[1] An adjudication of indigency does not automatically bar the assessment of costs against a defendant pursuant to sections 960.20 and 943.25(4) and (8), Florida Statutes.
[2] A defendant must be afforded prior notice of and an opportunity to object to the assessment of costs before such costs can be imposed.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWillie Brown was convicted of burglary and petit theft and was previously adjudged insolvent. The trial court assessed various costs against him, incl…
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 Notice And Opportunity To Object cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
This is a petition to review a decision of the Second District Court of Appeal reported as Brown v. State, 427 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). The issue before the district court was whether the trial court erred in assessing against the respondent, who was adjudged partially insolvent, costs of ten dollars pursuant to section 960.20, Florida Statutes (1981) (Crimes Compensation Fund); two dollars pursuant to section 943.25(4), Florida Statutes (1981); and one dollar pursuant to section 943.25(8), Florida Statutes (1981) (Law Enforcement Training and Correctional Officer Training Trust Funds). The district court held that because the respondent had been adjudged insolvent, the trial court erred in assessing these costs against him. Acknowledging conflict with the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Jenkins v. State, 422 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), the district court in the instant case certified the following question to be one of great public importance:
DOES AN ADJUDICATION OF INDI-GENCY UNDER SECTION 27.52, FLORIDA STATUTES (1981), AUTOMATICALLY BAR ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AGAINST A DEFENDANT PURSUANT TO SECTION 960.20 AND SECTION 943.25(4) AND (8)?
427 So. 2d at 273. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in our decision in Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), we answer the certified question in the negative. Although we disapprove the reasoning of the district court’s decision in the instant case, we approve the result reached. The assessment of costs would not be appropriate in this case because the respondent was not afforded prior notice of and an opportunity to object to the assessment of these costs.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, BOYD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur. ALDERMAN, C.J., dissents with an opinion in which McDONALD, J., concurs.
ALDERMAN, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent for the same reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984).
McDONALD, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Brown v. State, 427 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Jenkins v. State, 422 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)