HENRY ALFONSO, 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.
Court reversed in part and remanded, striking unauthorized probation conditions and court costs that were not orally announced or statutorily authorized.
Special probation conditions not orally imposed and certain court costs not statutorily authorized must be stricken from the judgment.
[1] Special conditions of probation that are not orally announced at sentencing must be stricken unless they are standard conditions provided by statute.
[2] Court costs may not be imposed pursuant to misprinted statutes or without statutory authorization, and costs not statutorily mandated require notice and opportunity to be…
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 intelligenceAppellant was sentenced pursuant to a no contest plea and received a probation order with multiple conditions and various court costs.…
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 Imposition Of Court Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal from a judgment and sentence pursuant to a no contest plea, appellant’s counsel raises two sentencing points.
Appellant first contends that eight conditions of his probation order should be stricken because they were not orally announced. Several of these were standard conditions, provided for in section 948.03, Florida Statutes (1991), and, thus, need not be orally pronounced. However, special conditions 6, 11, 21, and 22 are either unauthorized or may be authorized only if orally imposed and must, therefore, be stricken.
Various court costs were also imposed against appellant. As in Siplin v. State, 584 So. 2d 599 (Fla.2d DCA 1991), we strike costs imposed pursuant to two statutes printed on the final judgment, sections 943.25(4) and 943.25(8), Florida Statutes (1989), as these statutes are apparently misprinted and do not authorize imposition of costs. We also strike the costs assessed for the Court Improvement Fund and the County Drug Abuse Trust Fund as they are not statutorily mandated and may not be imposed without notice and an opportunity to be heard. The state may seek to reimpose these costs after proper notice and opportunity to be heard.
Reversed in part and remanded.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…393 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Wright v. State, 531 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Varela v. State, 550 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Zachary v. State, 559 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Siplin v. State, 584 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Alfonso v. State, 595 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Gawron v. State, 597 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Williams v. State, 601 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Reberv. State, 611 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Douglas v. State, 627 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Berry v. State, 636 S…
-
Hill v. State, 624 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…nt that he pay certain costs, contending that they were ordered without notice. A defendant must be given notice before costs can be imposed, unless those costs are statutorily mandated. State v. Beasley, 580 So. 2d 139 (Fla.1991); Alfonso v. State, 595 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The costs imposed upon Hill were not a part of the written judgment and sentence and are therefore not binding on him. The same is trae of conditions of probations announced in open court. They were never reduced to writing in an…
-
Bauman v. State, 600 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…ed probation order have merit. First, section 943.25(4), Florida Statutes (1989), which is printed on the final judgment and utilized to impose costs of $2.50, does not authorize the imposition of costs. We strike these costs. See Alfonso v. State, 595 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Siplin v. State, 584 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Second, the trial court orally imposed public defender fees in the amount of $150. The trial court, however, failed to include the public defender fees in the judgment and sent…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Columbus Ferry Siplin v. State, 584 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)