MARCUS WYMAN, 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.
Marcus Wyman appealed his conviction for possession of a weapon on school property and introduction of cocaine into a detention facility, challenging several probation conditions and costs. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but struck five probation conditions and a $50 prosecution cost that were either not orally pronounced at sentencing or lacked proper documentation.
The court affirmed the conviction but struck probation conditions twelve, thirteen, fifteen, sixteen, and seventeen because they constituted special conditions that were not orally pronounced at sentencing as required by law. The court also struck the $50 prosecution cost due to lack of supporting documentation.
[1] Special conditions of probation must be orally pronounced at sentencing and cannot be imposed if not announced.
[2] A defendant has constructive notice of probation conditions that are generally available and not specific to their case, even if not orally pronounced.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“special conditions of probation which must be orally pronounced. Since they were not, they are stricken”
Establishes the requirement that special probation conditions must be orally pronounced at sentencing to be enforceable.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWyman was convicted of possession of a weapon on school property and introduction of cocaine into a detention facility. At sentencing, the trial court…
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 Constructive Notice Of Probation Conditions cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant appeals his judgment and sentence for possession of a weapon on school property and introduction of cocaine into a detention facility. He also challenges the imposition of certain costs and conditions of his probation. We affirm his conviction, but strike three of the conditions of probation. We also strike the $50.00 cost of prosecution since there was no request or other documentation submitted to support the cost. See Jones v. State, 661 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Appellant challenges conditions four, six, nine, twelve, thirteen, fifteen, sixteen and seventeen of his probation because they were not orally pronounced at sentencing. In view of the supreme court’s recent ruling in State v. Hart, 668 So. 2d 589 (Fla.1996), we conclude that appellant had constructive notice of conditions four, six, and nine. Thus, the court did not err in failing to orally pronounce them at sentencing.
The remaining challenged conditions, however, must be stricken since they were not orally pronounced at sentencing. Conditions twelve, thirteen and seventeen provide that appellant submit to a drug and alcohol evaluation to determine if he has a drug problem and to successfully complete any treatment required, including random drug testing as ordered by the treatment center. The cost of evaluation, random testing and treatment is to be paid for-by appellant. These requirements constitute special conditions of probation which must be orally pronounced. Since they were not, they are stricken. See Nank v. State, 646 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Curry v. State, 656 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Condition fifteen provides: “You shall pay statutory costs in the amount of $300.00 at the rate of $25.00 per month, beginning with 30 days to the Clerk of the Circuit Court.” This is listed as a special condition of probation and was not orally pronounced. Thus, it must be stricken.
Finally, condition sixteen provides: “You shall submit to search and seizure of person, automobile or residence at any time by your probation officer without a warrant.” Since the trial court faded to announce this special condition, it is stricken.
Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence, but reverse the imposition of the special conditions and costs of prosecution unlawfully imposed.
PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Hart, 668 So. 2d 589 (Fla. 1996)
- Nank v. State, 646 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Curry v. State, 656 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Butler v. State, 661 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)