GEORGE R. HOBBY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1997-11-07
No. 96-00008
FRANK and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.
701 So. 2d 627 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1997)

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

A trial court must advise a defendant of the statutory authority and right to contest attorney's fees before imposing them. The court affirmed the costs assessment but reversed the public defender's lien due to procedural defects.


Facts & Procedural History

The appellant challenged a public defender's lien and the imposition of costs in his sentence. The trial court imposed the lien and costs without advi…

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
DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant challenges a public defender’s lien and the imposition of costs in his sentence. We affirm the costs assessment. We reverse the public defender’s lien.

A trial court may not impose an attorney’s fee without first advising the defendant of the statutory authority for its imposition and also advising the defendant of the right to contest the amount of the fee. See § 27.56, Fla. Stat. (1995); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.720; Brown v. State, 506 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 515 So. 2d 229 (Fla.1987). The trial court did not observe these requirements in assessing a public defender’s lien against the appellant.

On remand the attorney’s fee may be reimposed if the appellant is given thirty days from the date of the mandate to file a written objection to the amount of the attorney’s fee imposed. If the appellant objects, the fee shall be stricken but may be reimposed based on the trial court’s findings following a rehearing. Bourque v. State, 595 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

Except as specified herein, the appellant’s judgment and sentence are affirmed.

FRANK and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw