JOYCE A. AULTMAN, 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 certain costs against the appellant without proper notice, hearing, or statutory authority.
Following a conviction for grand theft, the trial court imposed costs as a condition of community control. The written order failed to include all ass…
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 Hearing For Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Joyce A. Aultman, appeals an order placing her on community control and imposing certain costs as a condition thereof. We affirm the trial court’s adjudication of guilt as well as the sentence imposed. We find, however, that the trial court erred in assessing certain costs against the appellant and, accordingly, strike those costs.
Following a nonjury trial, the trial court found the appellant guilty as charged of second degree grand theft and sentenced her to two years of community control. Among the conditions of the appellant’s community control, the trial court orally announced that the appellant was to pay “$100 in costs of prosecution,” “$250 to the Court Improvement Fund,” and “$125 in court costs.” The written order placing the appellant on community control and setting forth the conditions of community control failed to include the $125 in court costs. The trial court did not provide any statutory authority for its imposition of the various costs on this indigent defendant either in its oral pronouncement of the costs or in the written order. We do not consider that the court’s oral pronouncement provided adequate notice or opportunity to be heard, see Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), or even to object, when the pronouncement included no statutory authority for any of the three assessments. We, therefore, strike the costs without prejudice to the costs being reassessed after appropriate notice and hearing and the citation of proper statutory authority. See Allen v. State, 508 So. 2d 360 (Fla.2d DCA 1987); Brown v. State, 506 So. 2d 1068 (Fla.2d DCA 1987).
If the costs are reassessed, the trial court is cautioned that its written order must conform to its oral pronouncement. See Shaw v. State, 467 So. 2d 1087 (Fla.2d DCA 1985).
The order placing the appellant on community control is affirmed in all other respects.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and HALL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…g in a conviction or a withheld adjudication, and utilizing the complex procedure only in extraordinary cases involving documented special costs over $1000. However, this court must require compliance with the existing statutes. . Aultman v. State, 515 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Singletary v. State, 520 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Brewer v. State, 531 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Wright v. State, 531 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Varela v. State, 550 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Zachary v. State,…
-
Clem Gloster v. State, 528 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…2d DCA 1988). Failure to object to a court’s omission of statutory authority in imposing costs should constitute a waiver just as the failure to object to the amount of costs. However, because this court has held to the contrary in Aultman v. State, 515 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and in Moore, I concur in the majority opinion.…1 / 2
-
Twanda L. KEY v. State, 528 So. 2d 916 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…lation of Key’s recommended guidelines sentence absent the vacated conviction. We further find error in the trial court’s imposition of court costs at the sentencing hearing without providing any statutory authority for the costs. Aultman v. State, 515 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Such statutory support is also not included in the written judgment. Under these circumstances, the indigent defendant was not provided the required notice under Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), and opportunity to be…
Authorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Alphonso Brown v. State, 506 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Allen v. State, 508 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Shaw v. State, 467 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)