TIMOTHY CURTIS MCMAHON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Public Defender'S Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
The trial court erred in imposing a public defender’s lien without notice and opportunity to be heard.1 The order imposing a public defender’s lien in case number 89-606-CF-B-Y is hereby stricken without prejudice to a new determination of the matter by the trial court after proper notice and opportunity to be heard is afforded the defendant. The due process requirement that a criminal defendant receive adequate notice and opportunity to be heard is fundamental, not subject to the requirement of a contemporaneous objection nor an implied waiver.2 Except as modified by striking the order imposing a public defender’s lien, the defendant’s conviction and sentence is
AFFIRMED.
DANIEL, C.J., and GRIFFIN, J., concur. . Harriel v. State, 520 So. 2d 271 (Fla.1988); Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984).
. See Henriquez v. State, 545 So. 2d 1340 (Fla.1989); Wood v. State, 544 So. 2d 1004 (Fla.1989).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Donovan v. State, 572 So. 2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…e at all before entry of judgment imposing costs, we strike the award of costs without prejudice to a new determination of the matter by the trial court after proper notice and opportunity to be heard is afforded the appellant. See McMahon v. State, 561 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Clark v. State, 560 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). We affirm the conviction for organized fraud, reverse all of the convictions for grand theft, reverse all but one of the four RICO convictions, affirm the remaining RICO convi…
-
Norris v. State, 659 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…aiver. The due process requirements of rule 3.720(d)(1) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and section 27.56(7), Florida Statutes (1993), are not subject to an implied waiver. Henriquez v. State, 545 So. 2d 1340 (Fla.1989); McMahon v. State, 561 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Although Norris stated that he had no objection to the lien, Norris did not specifically waive the due process protections outlined in section 27.56(7). The better practice would have been to advise Norris of his rights and to a…
-
Grady v. State, 701 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…ears.or older is available as a defense to defendant charged with committing a lewd and lascivious act upon child under age of 16 years in violation of § 800.04, Fla. Stat.); Green v. State, 580 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (same); Hicks v. State, 561 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (defendant’s ignorance of the victim’s age was not a viable defense to defendant charged with use of a child in a sexual performance in violation of § 827.071(2), Fla. Stat.), rev. denied, 574 So. 2d 141 (Fla.1990); State v. Robin…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
- Wood v. State, 544 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1989)
- Harriel v. State, 520 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 1988)
- Henriquez v. State, 545 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. 1989)