ROBERT STANLEY COOPER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2023-05-26
No. 2022-2230
Feigenbaum, J., Lambert, C.J., Edwards, J., Pratt, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2023) Positive Treatment

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.


Holding

Investigative costs may not be assessed without a request, and a trial court must identify the specific probation conditions violated when revoking probation.


Headnotes

[1] Investigative costs may not be assessed against a defendant absent a request for such costs.

[2] A trial court must identify the specific probation conditions that a defendant violated when entering an order revoking probation.

Previewing 2 of 2 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

Facts & Procedural History

Robert Stanley Cooper appealed four misdemeanor cases in which he pled open to the court. The trial court assessed investigative costs of $50 to the D…

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.


Per_curiam
Per Curiam

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED ROBERT STANLEY COOPER, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D22-2230 LT Case Nos. 2022-304672-MMDB 2022-307874-MMDB 2022-305738-MMDB 2022-305749-MMDB STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed May 26, 2023 Appeal from the County Court for Volusia County, Bryan A. Feigenbaum, Judge. Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Nancy Ryan, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

2 PER CURIAM. We affirm this Anders1 appeal, except regarding two matters, as to four cases in which Appellant pled open to the court. First, investigative costs of $50 payable to the Daytona Beach Shores Police Department were assessed against Appellant in three of the four cases, despite the fact that there was apparently no request for same.2 See Richards v. State, 288 So. 3d 574, 576 (Fla. 2020). We reverse and remand for entry of amended orders that do not include investigative costs. Second, as to Case No. 2022- 304672-MM, the court failed to identify what conditions Appellant had violated that led to revocation of probation. See Hollis v. State, 277 So. 3d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (citing Patt v. State, 876 So. 2d 1278, 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)). We reverse and remand for entry of an amended order identifying the condition(s) the court found Appellant violated in that case. We affirm as to all other matters. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. LAMBERT, C.J., EDWARDS and PRATT, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
2 Investigative costs were not assessed in Case No. 2022-304672-MM.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw