SERGIO BOTERO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Public Defender'S Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant presents two issues for our consideration. He claims, first of all, that his motion for judgment of acquittal as to the charge of trafficking by possession should have been granted because of insufficient evidence. We find this issue is without merit. We do agree with the appellant, however, that the trial court erred in imposing a public defender hen without advising him of his right to a hearing to contest the amount of the lien. Wilson v. State, 675 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and sentence except that on remand the appellant shah have thirty days from the date of the mandate to file a written objection to the amount assessed. If an objection is filed, the trial court shall strike the assessment and shah not impose a new assessment without notice and hearing, pursuant to rule 3.720(d)(1), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Bourque v. State, 595 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
THREADGILL, C.J., and PATTERSON, J., and SCHEB, JOHN M., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Botero v. State, 742 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…ostconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm. Botero was found guilty of cocaine trafficking, and his conviction was affirmed by this court in an opinion issued on October 9, 1996. See Botero v. State, 681 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Botero then sought certiorari review in the supreme court, which was denied on March 18, 1997. Botero v. State, 691 So. 2d 1079 (Fla.1997). Botero’s conviction was not final until his petition for certiorari was denied by the sup…
-
Devine v. Kirkovich, 754 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…thorize an extension of time for filing suit must be a ‘good cause,’ [which is] not mere ‘ignorance of law, hardship on petitioner, and reliance on (another’s) advice.’ ”). Kirkovich relies on Kelly Assisted Living Servs., Inc. v. Estate of Reuter, 681 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), but that case involved a mistake of fact not a mistake of law. The claimants had inadvertently submitted the same claim twice and erroneously thought that only the second claim would be stricken. In Williams v. Estate of Williams…
-
In re Est. OF George H. Cadgene v. Cadgene, 938 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…tire claim be stricken because the partial objection lulled it into a false sense of security that only part of the claim would be stricken. In support of its argument, McLean Boulevard cited Kelly Assisted Living Services, Inc. v. Estate of Reuter, 681 So. 2d 813, 814-15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); In re Kemp’s Estate, 177 So. 2d 757, 762 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965); and In re Estate of Matchett, 394 So. 2d 437, 439-40 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). However, the record before this court does not contain a transcript of the hearing on…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bourque v. State, 595 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Milo L. Kirkland v. State, 675 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Wilson v. State, 675 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)