STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHN MATKE, RESPONDENT
STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
JOHN MATKE, RESPONDENT
761 So. 2d 317
Florida Supreme Court (2000)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the decision in Matke v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D469, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 55968 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 13, 1998), on the basis of certified conflict. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in our opinion in Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000), we quash the decision below and find that the unpreserved sentencing error in this case regarding costs does not constitute fundamental error. It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perry v. State, 767 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…Judge. Perry appealed his sentence, which was affirmed by this court. However, the Florida Supreme Court reinstated his appeal 'for consideration of the sentencing [*1283] issue in light of Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000). Perry v. State, 761 So. 2d 317 (Fla.2000). We agree that the sentence appears to have exceeded the permissible guidelines range and was rendered without the trial court’s giving written reasons for departure. However, since it also appears the sentence may be sustained based on P…
Authorities Cited
- Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2000)