DEAN ALLEN MATTHEWS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court may not impose a mandatory court cost under section 938.10, Florida Statutes, when the victim of the offense is not a minor.
[1] A mandatory court cost under section 938.10, Florida Statutes, may be imposed only when a defendant commits an offense against a minor, and the cost is unauthorized when…
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 intelligenceA jury convicted the appellant of three counts of sexual battery with force likely to cause serious personal injury, and the trial court sentenced him…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.800(B)(2) Motion To Correct Sentencing Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
A jury found Appellant guilty of three counts of sexual battery with force likely to cause serious personal injury, and the trial court sentenced him to life in prison. As preserved for review by his motion to correct a sentencing error under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), Appellant challenges the trial court’s imposition of a $151 court cost under section 938.10, Florida Statutes. That statute mandates the imposition of such a cost when a defendant commits an offense “against a minor” in violation of certain criminal statutes. § 938.10(1), Fla. Stat. As the State concedes and the record confirms, the victim in this case was not a minor. Accordingly, the $151 cost is unauthorized. We remand the case to the trial court with instructions to strike the $151 cost under section 938.10. In all other respects, we affirm Appellant’s convictions and sentences. Because the correction of Appellant’s written sentencing document is a ministerial act, neither a resentencing nor Appellant’s presence is required.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with instructions.
KELSEY, JAY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur. _____________________________