AARON ROGERS
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.
The appellate court affirmed most of the trial court's decisions but remanded two issues for correction. The court corrected an order revoking community control to accurately reflect the admitted violations and removed an unauthorized investigative cost imposed by the trial court.
The appellate court held that the trial court erred in the written revocation order by misstating the conditions of community control. The court also held that the trial court erred in imposing investigative costs that were not part of the plea agreement or requested by the State.
[1] A trial court must ensure that an order revoking community control accurately reflects the conditions of community control that were charged and admitted to by the defend…
[2] A trial court may impose investigatory costs only when requested by the State or the agency involved.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to enter an amended order of revocation reflecting the correct conditions of community control that Rogers violated.”
Establishes the court's decision to remand for correction of the revocation order.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAaron Rogers challenged orders revoking his community control and judgments/sentences. In one case, the revocation order inaccurately listed the condi…
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 Terms cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated Anders1 appeals, Aaron Rogers challenges the order revoking community control entered by the trial court in one of his cases below, together
with the judgments and sentences imposed in both cases. Having carefully reviewed the record, we affirm, without further discussion, except for the following two issues.
First, in case number 2017-300370-CF, Rogers was alleged to have violated four conditions of his community control. He entered into a plea agreement with the State, admitting to the charged violations and approving an agreed-upon prison sentence. The trial court accepted Rogers’s plea and imposed sentence consistent with the parties’ agreement. However, the order revoking community control listed two conditions that were neither charged nor admitted to by Rogers as having been violated, and also did not include two of the conditions that Rogers did admit to having violated. Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to enter an amended order of revocation reflecting the correct conditions of community control that Rogers violated. See Reyes v. State, 44 So. 3d 216, 216 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (affirming revocation of probation and resultant sentence, but remanding for the trial court to correct the written order to accurately reflect the condition of probation violated).
Second, in case number 2017-304677-CF, the trial court ordered Rogers to pay $100 for costs of investigation under section 938.27, Florida Statutes (2017), to the Volusia County Sheriff’s Office. This cost was not part of the written plea agreement between Rogers and the State. It was not requested by the prosecutor, nor was it orally pronounced nor, for that matter, mentioned by the court when it imposed the negotiated sentence.
“Trial courts may impose investigatory costs, but only when requested by the State or agency involved.” See Desrosiers v. State, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2951 (Fla. 4th DCA Dec. 11, 2019) (citing Chambers v. State, 217 So. 3d 210, 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)).
Here, because the record is clear that the State never requested reimbursement for investigative costs and Rogers never agreed to pay them, we remand with directions that the trial court enter an amended order in this case that does not include the $100 investigative costs.
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.
ORFINGER, LAMBERT, and TRAVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rogers v. State, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2951 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)
-
Rogers v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Chambers v. State, 217 So. 3d 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Reyes v. State, 44 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Rogers v. State, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2951 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)