VASHAUN SMITH, 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.
Vashaun Smith appealed his conviction and sentence. The court affirmed his conviction and sentence but struck certain discretionary costs, remanded for itemization of mandatory costs, and vacated the public defender's lien assessment due to procedural defects in how costs were imposed.
The court affirmed the $20 and $3 mandatory costs and the $200 cost under section 27.3455(1), but struck the $2 discretionary cost for lack of oral announcement and struck $72 in unidentified costs. The court vacated the $300 public defender's lien due to lack of statutory citation and failure to advise Smith of his right to contest the amount, and remanded for proper procedures.
[1] Mandatory costs may be imposed without pronouncement by the trial court.
[2] Discretionary costs must be announced by the trial court at sentencing.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The mandatory costs of $20 and $3 may be imposed without pronouncement, and we affirm those items.”
Establishes that some mandatory costs do not require oral announcement at sentencing.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmith was convicted and sentenced to include $300 in state-mandated costs and a fine. The judgment itemized various mandatory costs totaling $295, a d…
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 Mandatory Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
NORTHCUTT, Judge.
Vashaun Smith’s counsel filed an Anders1 brief, contending that he could find no meritorious grounds to support this appeal. After reviewing the record and the brief filed in this cause, we agree in part with the appellant’s counsel. We affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence, but strike certain discretionary costs and remand for further proceedings with respect to mandatory costs and the public defender’s lien.
At sentencing, the trial court announced $300 in state-mandated costs and a fine, and set the fine to be “anything in excess of state-mandated costs.” The judgment itemizes mandatory costs of $20 pursuant to section 960.20, Florida Statutes (1995), and $3 pursuant to section 943.25(3), Florida Statutes (1995), and a discretionary cost of $2 pursuant to section 943.25(13). The judgment also assesses $269.75 in lump sum costs without statutory authority; however, the disposition memorandum reflects a $5 fine and $295 in costs.
The mandatory costs of $20 and $3 may be imposed without pronouncement, and we affirm those items. Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111, 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We strike the $2 cost because its imposition is discretionary and must be announced by the trial court at sentencing. 655 So. 2d at 116.
Section 27.3455(1), Florida Statutes (1995), provides for a mandatory cost for felony convictions of $200. Although the line on the judgment that imposes this cost is not checked, it apparently accounts for $200 of the $295 “state-mandated costs” assessment. The court is not obligated to announce orally the dollar amount of mandatory costs or to separately identify the legal basis for them at the sentencing hearing, although it is the better practice to do so. 655 So. 2d at 117.
Thus, we affirm this $200 cost; however, we remand so that the trial court can itemize this cost by citation to section 27.3455(1). Based upon the limited record, we cannot otherwise identify those costs which make up the difference between the mandatory costs of $223 and the $295 in costs imposed by the court. We, therefore, strike costs of $72. On remand, the State may seek to reimpose appropriate costs.
The trial court asked and the appellant agreed that $300 was a reasonable public defender’s fee. But the court improperly assessed the fee and imposed a lien to secure it because the court did not recite, nor did the record reflect the statutory authority for its imposition, section 27.56, Florida Statutes (1995).
The court also failed to advise the appellant of his right to contest the amount of the lien under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1).
See S.D. v. State, 687 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Halyard v. State, 667 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
On remand, the appellant shah have thirty days from the date of the mandate within which to file a written objection to the amount assessed. If an objection is filed with the trial court, the assessment shah be stricken and a new assessment shah not be imposed without notice and a hearing pursuant to rule 3.720(d)(1).
Sandefur v. State, 660 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Bourque v. State, 595 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Conviction affirmed, certain costs stricken and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gonse v. State, 713 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…e at sentencing, as Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1) requires, “of the imposition of a lien pursuant to section 27.56, Florida Statutes” and of the defendant’s “right to a hearing to contest the amount of the lien.” See Smith v. State, 694 So. 2d 838, 839 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). In imposing investigative costs, the trial court merely stated, “eighty dollars to the Sheriffs Office.” To impose this cost on remand, the State must request it and document the amount. See Imhoff v. State, 673 So. 2d 94 (…
-
Harrison v. State, 698 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…3), Florida Statutes (1995). See Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111, 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (en banc). The trial court also erred in failing to give Mr. Harrison notice that he could object to the amount of the public defender’s fee. See Smith v. State, 694 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). On remand, Mr. Harrison shall have thirty days from the date of mandate in which to file objections to the amount of the lien. See id. at 839. PARKER, C.J., and ALTENBERND and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.…
-
McDONALD v. State, 700 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…n failing to give Mr. McDonald notice that he could object to the amount of the public defender’s fee, on remand Mr. McDonald shall have thirty days front the date of mandate in which to file objections to the amount of the lien. See Smith v. State, 694 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA1997). Affirmed and remanded with directions. ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and FULMER and QUINCE, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Bourque v. State, 595 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Halyard v. State, 667 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Delegge v. State, 687 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Sandefur v. State, 660 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)