THURMOND MICHAEL HARRISON, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed robbery and habitual felony offender conviction but vacated public defender's lien and restitution amounts, requiring notice and hearing on remand.
A trial court must provide notice and an opportunity to be heard before imposing a public defender's lien and restitution, though other trial court rulings regarding jury procedures and venue transfer were proper.
[1] A trial court must provide notice and an opportunity to be heard before imposing a public defender's lien or restitution.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarrison was convicted of robbery and sentenced as a habitual felony offender. He challenged his conviction and sentence on four grounds: jury viewing…
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 Public Defender'S Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant asserts the following errors in challenging his robbery conviction and habitual felony offender sentence: (1) the trial court erroneously denied his motion for new trial that was based upon the jury’s courtroom viewing of a videotape of the alleged crime that had been admitted into evidence while a bailiff and an alternate juror were present during the viewing; (2) the trial court erroneously denied his motion for new trial alleging that a juror overheard prosecution witnesses discuss their testimony outside the courtroom; (3) the trial court erroneously denied his motion to randomly transfer his case out of the Fourth Judicial Circuit’s “career criminal court;” and (4) the trial court erroneously imposed a public defender’s lien and restitution without giving appellant notice of his right to a hearing to contest the amounts.
The first two issues are without merit, and we affirm without further elaboration. Affir-mance as to the third issue is mandated by our decision in Dennis v. State, 673 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). As to the fourth issue, we must vacate the amounts imposed for the public defender’s lien and for restitution. See Brown v. State, 672 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (public defender’s hen); Norman v. State, 659 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (restitution). These amounts may be reimposed on remand, provided that appehant is given notice and an opportunity to be heard.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED, with directions.
MINER, ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. O'Neal, 673 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Kennegrue Edward Brown v. State, 672 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Norman v. State, 659 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Graham v. State, 659 So. 2d 722 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)