SHINDARREL EVANS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1997-06-20
No. 96-01290
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
695 So. 2d 891 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1997) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that investigative costs imposed without record support must be stricken and remanded for proper procedure.


Facts & Procedural History

The appellant challenged investigative costs imposed in three circuit court cases. In one case, costs were imposed without record support, and in anot…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges only the investigative costs imposed against her in circuit court case numbers 94-15736 and 95-17451. We affirm her judgments and sentences in all three lower court cases and the investigative costs of $36.00 imposed in case number 95-09467.

The agency and the state requested $62.61 in investigative costs in case number 94-15736; however, the trial court imposed $216.00 without any record support. We therefore strike the $216.00 figure in the sentence, the corresponding judgment for fine and costs, and the order of probation without prejudice for the state to seek reimposition on remand.

Neither the state nor the agency provided any documentation supporting investigative costs in ease number 95-17451. See § 939.01, Fla. Stat. (1995); Delegge v. State, 687 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); James v. State, 662 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We therefore strike the differing figures imposed in the sentence, corresponding judgment for fine and costs, and the order of probation without prejudice for the state to seek reimposition on remand. If on remand the state desires to seek investigative costs in case numbers 94-15736 and 95-17451, it must follow the procedures set forth in Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

Judgments and sentences affirmed with the exception of all investigative costs; costs stricken in two cases and remanded with instructions.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • M.B. v. State, 706 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
    …available term of imprisonment for the statutory maximum. In this case, because the offense is a first degree misdemeanor, the term of community control must not exceed one year. See M.G. v. State, 696 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); M.S. v. State, 695 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Order imposing community control reversed; remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion. PARKER, C.J., and THREADGILL, J., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).…
  • G.E.H. a child v. State, 744 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
    …t be limited to one year, the maximum adult sentence for that offense. See J.D. v. State, 732 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); M.B. v. State, 706 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); M.G. v. State, 696 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); [*1212] M.S. v. State, 695 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s disposition order and remand to the trial court with directions to enter a new disposition order consistent with this opinion. Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded. CAMPB…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw