JONATHAN ALBERT MILLS, 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 a discretionary cost requires oral notification, a statutory fine requires notice and findings, and certain costs are limited per case, not per count.
Appellant pleaded no contest to battery and resisting an officer and was sentenced to probation, a fine, and costs. He appealed the fine and 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.
DANAHY, Judge.
The appellant challenges the sentence imposed upon him after he pled no contest to two counts of simple battery and one count of resisting an officer without violence. The appellant was sentenced to two consecutive years of probation for the battery charges, and we find no flaw in that aspect of the sentence. However, we agree with the appellant that a fine and certain costs imposed upon him as conditions of probation are improper. The cost of $2 for the criminal justice education fund under section 943.25(13),' Florida Statutes (1995), is a discretionary cost and may not be imposed without oral notification to the defendant. The state concedes that this item was not orally pronounced at sentencing.
The fine of $500 pursuant to section 775.0835, Florida Statutes (1995), must be stricken because it was imposed without notice and without findings required by the statute. See Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Additional costs under section 27.3455(1) are determined by the offense lev el and can be levied only per case and not per count. Thus, for his two misdemeanors, the appellant may be assessed only $50. See Faulk v. State, 661 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
For the foregoing reasons, we strike the fíne and costs listed above as being improper in this case. We also correct a scrivener’s error in the judgment and sentence which describes the “degree of crime” as “F” when it should be “M.”
With these changes in the judgment and sentence, we affirm.
RYDER, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Webster v. State, 705 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…y authority upon which the costs are imposed. See Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); see also Smith v. State, 686 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). In addition, statutory costs must be assessed per case, not per count. See Mills v. State, 672 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Rafael v. State, 679 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), approved, 688 So. 2d 335 (Fla.1997). Because the court failed to include the proper statutory authority for the assessment of costs in its written sentencing order, the $600 fo…
-
Brenton McNeil v. State, 215 So. 3d 55 (Fla. 2017)…y op. at 59 (citing Rafael v. State, 679 So. 2d 314, 315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Hunter v. State, 651 So. 2d 1258, 1260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Hollingsworth v. State, 632 So. 2d 176, 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)); majority op. at 59-60 (citing Mills v. State, 672 So. 2d 873, 873-74 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)); see also McNeil, 162 So. 3d at 281 (Sawaya, J., dissenting) (citing Stickles v. State, 44 So. 3d 653, 654 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); Webster v. State, 705 So. 2d 970, 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Van Vorous v. State, 696 So. 2d 131…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Faulk v. State, 661 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)