C.R., A CHILD, 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 adjudication of delinquency but reversed the imposition of the public defender lien due to lack of notice.
A child was charged with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and adjudicated delinquent. The trial court imposed a public defender lien wi…
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 Aggravated Assault On A Law Enforcement Officer cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, C.R., a child, challenges the trial court’s order which adjudicated him to have committed delinquent acts. We affirm the adjudication of delinquency but reverse the imposition of the public defender lien.
On February 7, 1995, the state charged the appellant with two counts of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer in violation of section 784.07(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1993). After a hearing, the trial court found the appellant guilty as charged and adjudicated him a delinquent child. He was placed on community control and ordered to pay a $50 public defender lien. A timely notice of appeal followed.
We find no merit in the appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in denying his motions for judgment of acquittal and, accordingly, affirm the trial court’s findings of guilt without further discussion.
The appellant also contends, and the state agrees, that the trial court erred in imposing a $50 public defender lien because the record discloses it was imposed without apprising the appellant of his right to challenge the amount. We agree that the trial court improperly imposed the public defender lien and, accordingly, strike it without prejudice to its reimposition after proper notice is given to the appellant.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and BLUE and FULMER, JJ., concur.