DAVID MERLE KNAUS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Rodriguez v. State, 691 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
  …e that the error is fundamental and that the order must be stricken because it is an illegal order since it is ordered to be paid to the Sheriff’s Depart-Departand police agencies do not meet the statutory definition of “victim.” See Knaus v. State, 638 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); § 775.089(1), Fla.Stat. (1993). Accordingly, we strike the $1,900 restitution order. Ap- [*570] pedant’s conviction and sentence are otherwise affirmed. QUINCE and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.…
• Leto v. State, 658 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
  …ses hold that erroneous advice by defense [*1110] counsel as to the probable length of confinement may affect voluntariness where the defendant can show that the plea would not have been made without the erroneous advice. See, e.g., Warren v. State, 638 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Elias v. State, 531 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Mantle v. State, 592 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Joyner v. State, 583 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), rev. denied, 595 So. 2d 557 (Fla.1992); Lundgren v. State, 581 So. 2d…
• Seidman v. State, 847 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
  …titution.... § 775.089(l)(a)l.-2. Seidman cites to cases that stand for the proposition that this state agency cannot be defined as a victim under this statute. Both Rodriguez v. State, 691 So. 2d 568, 569-70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) and Knaus v. State, 638 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) hold that a sheriffs department does not meet the statutory definition of “victim.” See also Staudt v. State, 616 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (holding that police agency is not a “victim” under restitution statute, and therefor…

Authorities Cited

• Staudt v. State, 616 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
• Bain v. State, 559 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)