WILLIAM OTIS JONES, 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.
William Otis Jones appealed the revocation of his community control sentence through an Anders brief. The court affirmed the revocation itself but reversed and remanded the portion of the judgment imposing court costs, finding errors in the calculation and imposition of mandatory and discretionary costs.
The court affirmed Jones' sentence of revocation but reversed the cost portion. It held that the court failed to assess $200 in mandatory costs under section 27.3455(1), incorrectly imposed $20 instead of $50 for the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund under the amended section 960.20, and improperly imposed discretionary costs without oral pronouncement at sentencing or proper statutory citation.
[1] A trial court has no discretion to dispense with mandatory costs.
[2] Mandatory costs must be assessed by the trial court, even if the judgment form is outdated.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“A trial court "has no discretion to dispense with [mandatory] costs."”
Establishes that courts must impose all mandatory costs required by statute without exception
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones violated his community control orders and admitted to the violation. A trial court revoked his community control and imposed various court costs…
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 Oral Pronouncement Of Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the appellant, William Otis Jones, challenges the revocation of his community control, which he admittedly violated. The public defender suggests that Jones’ sentence and certain court costs be reviewed for possible error. We affirm Jones’ sentence; however, we reverse and remand with respect to the imposition of court costs.
The judgment entered upon the revocation of Jones’ community control orders Jones to pay $20 in costs pursuant to section 960.20, Florida Statutes; $3 pursuant to section 943.25(3); $2 pursuant to section 943.25(13); and $269.75 in “other” costs, with no citation to statutory authority.
A trial court “has no discretion to dispense with [mandatory] costs.” Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111, 116 (Fla. 2d DCA1995). Though the instant judgment properly imposes $3 in mandatory costs pursuant to section 943.25(3), Florida Statutes (1993), it fails to assess $200 in mandatory costs pursuant to section 27.3455(1) and incorrectly imposes $20 in mandatory costs pursuant to section 960.20 for the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund. The crimes here occurred on October 13, 1994. By that time, section 960.20 had been amended to increase the mandatory cost for the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund to $50. See § 960.20, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1992). See also Reyes, 655 So. 2d at 117. Since the foregoing errors are due, at least in part, to the use of an outdated judgment form, we remand for preparation of a proper written judgment reflecting all mandatory costs and the statutory bases for such.
Further, the $2 cost imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13) is a discretionary cost, which was not orally pronounced at sentencing. See Reyes. That cost is therefore stricken. The $269.75 in “other” costs are likewise stricken, as those costs were not orally pronounced at sentencing and the statutory bases for such were not otherwise indicated. Id. See also Kirby v. State, 695 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). On remand, the state may seek reimposition of all discretionary costs provided that Jones is given notice and an opportunity to be heard, and the written judgment is otherwise prepared to reflect the statutory authority for each cost. See Kirby, 695 So. 2d at 890 (citing Sutton v. State, 635 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
FRANK, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maddox v. State, 708 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1997). . Bowen v. State, 702 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (striking payment of $100 to the Drug Abuse Trust Fund and $100 to the Florida Crime Lab because order failed to cite statutory authority for these costs); Jones v. State, 700 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (striking imposition of discretionary costs where costs were not orally pronounced at sentencing and the statutory bases for such were not otherwise indicated); Fisher v. State, 697 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (striking costs…
-
Celese Gordon v. State, 139 So. 3d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…e fine is not in isolation, and, given the mandatory terms of imprisonment, is not particularly likely to be repaid. Further, the circuit court was without discretion to deviate from the statute because the language is mandatory. See Jones v. State, 700 So. 2d 776, 776 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (“A trial court has no discretion to dispense with [mandatory] costs.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Nor was the fine imposed a maximum, but rather the amount is fixed. Accordingly, the trial court had no…
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)
- Sutton v. State, 635 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Kirby v. State, 695 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)