STEVEN SIMMONS, 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.
The court held that certain conditions of probation, if not pronounced in open court, must be corrected in the written order. Some conditions were affirmed, while others were reversed.
Steven Simmons appealed his written order of probation, arguing that the trial court imposed certain conditions without first pronouncing them in open…
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 Discretionary Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Steven Simmons appeals his written order of probation on the grounds that the trial court imposed certain conditions without first pronouncing them in open court. Appellant has raised several meritorious points and to that extent we reverse as set forth below. We otherwise affirm the written order of probation.
The trial court erred in prohibiting appellant from using intoxicants to excess as a condition of probation. See Zeigler v. State, 647 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). The trial court also erred in requiring appellant, without pronouncement in open court, to pay $2 for the “County Resolution Criminal Justice Trust Fund” as this is a discretionary cost under section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993). See Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
The trial court also partially erred when it imposed the following condition without pronouncement:
You will neither possess, carry or own any firearms, and you will not possess, carry or own any weapons without first procuring the consent of your Officer. We affirm that part of the condition concerning firearms; however, we reverse the prohibition against weapons. See Vasquez v. State, 663 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).
Accordingly, we remand to the trial court with instructions to correct the probation order consistent herewith.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.
DELL, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Beryl Mosley v. State, 677 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…e for the County Resolution Criminal Justice Trust Fund. This condition of probation must be stricken as it is a discretionary cost under section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), and must be orally pronounced in open court. See Simmons v. State, 662 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). We reject appellant’s argument that the “standard conditions” of probation provided in section 948.03(1), Florida Statutes (1993), and contained in the probation order would not apply to her unless orally pronounced because she…
Authorities Cited
- Vasquez v. State, 663 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Zeigler v. State, 647 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Williams v. State, 591 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)