SANDY DANIELS, 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.
Sandy Daniels appealed the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and the imposition of costs and fees. The court affirmed the denial of the motion for acquittal and attorney's fees but partially reversed regarding certain costs, striking an undocumented $100 lab cost while upholding other statutory costs.
The court affirmed the $3 and $2 cost awards as authorized by the current version of section 943.25(3) and 943.25(13), Florida Statutes. The court reversed the $100 lab cost, directing it be stricken because it was not documented as required by section 939.01(1), Florida Statutes.
[1] A court may not impose a $100 lab cost against a convicted person without documentation, as required by statute.
[2] Investigative costs incurred by law enforcement agencies are authorized to be included in the judgment against a convicted person if requested and documented.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“In all criminal cases the costs of prosecution, including investigative costs incurred by law enforcement agencies, and by fire departments for arson investigations, if requested and documented by such agencies, shall be included and entered in the judgment rendered against the convicted person.”
Establishes that the $100 lab cost must be documented by the law enforcement agency to be valid under section 939.01(1)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe lower court imposed a $3 cost pursuant to section 943.25(4), a $2 cost pursuant to section 943.25(8), and a $100 lab cost in favor of the Florida …
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 Restitution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Sandy Daniels appeals the lower court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and imposition of costs and fees. We affirm the lower court’s denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal and imposition of attorney’s fees. We write solely to address Daniels’ claims regarding certain costs the lower court imposed.
The lower court filled out a form imposing a court cost of $3 pursuant to section 943.25(4), Florida Statutes and an additional sum of $2 pursuant to section 943.25(8), Florida Statutes. Section 943.25(4), Florida Statutes (1993) does not authorize a $3 cost and section 943.25(8), Florida Statutes (1993) does not authorize the imposition of an additional $2 cost. The referenced sections did impose these costs under the 1985 version of section 943.25, Florida Statutes. Since that time the section has been modified.*
We affirm the $3 and $2 cost awards. Acankta v. State, 622 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). The current authorization for the costs the lower court imposed is section 943.25(3) and section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes. We note the supreme court has amended the form to reflect the current statutory authority for the imposition of costs. In re Amendments to the Fla.Rules of Cr. Proc., 606 So. 2d 227, 351 (Fla.1992).
In open court, the trial judge orally assessed a $100 lab cost in favor of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. On the written judgment and sentence the lower court incorrectly listed the $100 as restitution. The $100 lab cost is not restitution but is authorized by section 939.01(1), Florida Statutes (1993), if documented. That section provides:
In all criminal cases the costs of prosecution, including investigative costs incurred by law enforcement agencies, and by fire departments for arson investigations, if requested and documented by such agencies, shall be included and entered in the judgment rendered against the convicted person.
(Emphasis supplied.) There was no documentation of the $100 cost. Accordingly, we direct that the $100 cost be stricken from the Judgment and Sentence form.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
ERVIN, MINER, and BENTON, JJ., concur. *
First, section 943.25(4), Florida Statutes, which authorized the $3 cost, was reworded and the $3 was imposed in the introductory language to the section, effective July 1, 1986. Ch. 86-187, § 16, at 1388, Laws of Fla. Next, the section was reworded and the $3 was imposed pursuant to section 943.25(3), Florida Statutes, and section 943.25(8) which authorized the additional $2 was reworded and the $2 was authorized pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes, effective October 1, 1987. Ch. 87-186, § 3, at 1240, 1243 Laws of Fla.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Madison v. State, 664 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…nt could not be sustained on this ground. See Brown v. State, 657 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (assessment of $250.00 investigative costs stricken when state failed to request or document the cost as required by section 939.01); Daniels v. State, 656 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (cost award to FDLE stricken where there was no documentation for the cost). Further we note that cost awards for the drug abuse program authorized by section 893.13(8)(a) and for the FDLE trust fund (for the criminal analysis l…
-
Pickett v. State, 678 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…No documentation was provided for that cost, nor was there any reference to the statute supporting such an order. This was error and the cost must accordingly be stricken. See Madison v. State, 664 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Daniels v. State, 656 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Similarly, the $500 cost of prosecution that appellant was ordered to pay must be stricken because it was unsupported by documentation. See Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Smith v. State, 543 So. 2d 348 (Fla.…
-
Terry v. State, 791 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…minimum mandatory sentence and imposition of the public defender’s fee. We strike the $330 investigation and prosecution cost from the written order because the State failed to provide documentation of this requested amount. See Daniels v. State, 656 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); § 938.27(1), Fla. Stat. The $2 discretionary cost imposed pursuant to section 938.15, Florida Statutes, is also stricken because it cannot be imposed without Appellant receiving notice and an opportunity to be heard. See Brooks…
Authorities Cited
- In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 606 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1992)
- Acankta v. State, 622 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)