DAVID EUGENE PETERSON, 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 imposing court costs and attorney's fees without prior notice, and that such imposition requires reversal and remand.
Appellant was convicted of five counts of third degree burglary. The trial court imposed sentences, including court costs and attorney's fees, without…
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 Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
ERVIN, Judge.
Appellant David Eugene Peterson appeals from his convictions for five counts of third degree burglary and the sentences imposed therefor. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.
Neither of appellant’s first two issues are meritorious. First, the stop was a valid traffic stop, because appellant’s vehicle was obstructing a roadway. Second, the trial judge’s resolution against appellant of the conflicting evidence dealing with the consensual search issue is supported by the record. See State v. Stephens, 441 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Finally, appellant’s sentences1 were within the recommended guidelines sentencing range2 and none of the individual sentences exceeded the statutory maximum. § 810.02(1), (3), Fla.Stat. (1987); § 775.082(3)(d), Fla.Stat. (1987).
We do, however, find merit in appellant’s third point that the trial court erred by imposing court costs and attorney’s fees without prior notice. Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984); Goodling v. State, 482 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). The fact that no contemporaneous objection was made at the time the costs and fees were imposed does not preclude appellate review of the issue. Harriel v. State, 520 So. 2d 271 (Fla.1988). Therefore, those parts of the sentences assessing costs and fees must be reversed and the case re manded to the trial court for further consistent proceedings.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED
BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur. . Appellant was sentenced to 24 months’ incarceration for the first count, to a consecutive 5-year probationary term for the second count, and to 5-year probationary terms for the last three counts, each of those sentences to be served concurrently, but consecutive to the sentences imposed for .counts one and two.
.' Appellant’s recommended guideline sentence was community control or 12-30 months’ incarceration.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boudreaux v. State, 553 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…affording appellant notice of the court’s intent to impose such a condition and without ascertaining the appellant’s ability to pay. The fact that the appellant did not object to this condition does not preclude appellate review. Peterson v. State, 543 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). However, because the appellant did fail to object, the remaining conditions are not preserved for review. Brunson v. State, 537 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Therefore, the remaining conditions are affirmed without prejudice t…
Authorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
- Harriel v. State, 520 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 1988)
- Goodling v. State, 482 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
- State v. Robert and Denise Stephens, 441 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)