RICKY LYNN NORTON, 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 affirmed the judgment but struck certain probation conditions and costs/fines that were not orally pronounced or lacked statutory authority.
The appellant, Ricky Norton, pro se, challenged specific probation conditions and costs/fines after his appellate counsel filed an Anders brief. The s…
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 Special Conditions Of Probation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ricky Norton, pro se, filed a brief challenging certain probation conditions and costs/fines. We affirm the judgment, but strike the following conditions of probation and costs/ fines.
Norton argues and the state agrees that the portions of conditions 8 and 20 requiring Norton to pay for random drug testing and to pay for an evaluation for alcohol abuse must be stricken as they are special conditions of probation not orally pronounced. McCoy v. State, 675 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Additionally, we strike condition 24, requiring an evaluation to determine the need for inpatient drug treatment; it is a special condition of probation which was not orally pronounced. State v. Hart, 668 So. 2d 589 (Fla.1996).
Finally, we strike the $433.00 cost/ fine which was imposed without statutory authority, and the $2.00 cost imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), since it was not orally pronounced at sentencing. Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)(en banc).
RYDER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
KEY v. State, 788 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…See Yashus v. State, 745 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). In this circumstance, under Yashus, the trial court was not authorized to impose a habitual sentence upon a violation of the community control. In Yashus, this court, relying on King v. State, 681 So. 2d 1186 (Fla.1996), reversed a habitual offender sentence imposed after a second violation of probation because, although Yashus had agreed to habitual offender treatment in the original plea agreement, the original sentence imposed did not exceed the statu…
-
Baron Walker v. State, 709 So. 2d 1391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…ring Walker to pay for drug or alcohol testing. See Williams v. State, 700 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), review granted, 707 So. 2d 1127 (Fla.1998). We also strike Condition C, calling for drug/alcohol evaluation and treatment. See Norton v. State, 681 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). [*1392] The judgment and sentence are otherwise affirmed. FRANK, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- State v. Hart, 668 So. 2d 589 (Fla. 1996)
- McCOY v. State, 675 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)