JOHN HUDSON, 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.
Affirmed convictions for firearm and battery offenses but reversed restitution order because defendant was not given notice and opportunity to be heard before restitution was imposed under the pre-amendment statute.
Restitution cannot be imposed without notice and opportunity to be heard when the crime occurred before the October 1, 1984 amendment to section 775.089.
[1] Prior to the October 1, 1984 amendment to section 775.089, Florida Statutes, notice and opportunity to be heard are required before restitution can be imposed.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted of felonious possession of a firearm, carrying a concealed firearm, and aggravated battery for a crime occurring on September …
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 Carrying A Concealed Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Judge.
Appellant appeals the judgments and sentences against him for felonious possession of a firearm, carrying a concealed firearm, and aggravated battery.
Four of the five points on appeal raised by appellant relate to his trial. All of those points are without merit, therefore, we find his trial was properly conducted and we affirm the judgment of guilt.
Appellant’s remaining point on appeal has merit. The crime of which appellant was convicted occurred on September 22, 1984. The law concerning restitution in effect at the time was section 775.089, Florida Statutes (1983). This court has consistently held that prior to the amendment of the statute effective October 1,1984, notice and opportunity to be heard is required before restitution can be imposed. Gibbons v. State, 479 So. 2d 284, 285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Harris v. State, 452 So. 2d 1041, 1042 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Appellant was not given notice and an opportunity to be heard before the imposition of restitution. We reverse the order of restitution and remand for reconsideration of that issue upon proper notice. Nothing we say here precludes the imposition of restitution after proper notice and hearing. Otherwise, the judgments and sentences are affirmed.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Harris v. State, 452 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Gibbons v. State, 479 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)