JAMES CARTER, 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.
Carter appealed his conviction and sentence, challenging a $100 assessment to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Trust Fund and a $250 public defender lien. The court affirmed the conviction but reversed both the assessment and lien as improper, holding that discretionary costs must be orally pronounced at sentencing and defendants must be advised of their right to contest lien amounts.
The court held that the $100 assessment was improper because it is a discretionary cost that was not orally pronounced at sentencing, and the $250 public defender lien was improper because the trial court failed to advise the defendant of his right to contest the amount. The court also held that sentencing issues can be raised for the first time through a timely rule 3.800(b) motion even if not objected to at sentencing.
[1] A discretionary cost assessed at sentencing is improper if not orally pronounced.
[2] A public defender lien must be reversed if the trial court fails to advise the defendant of their right to contest the amount.
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“The assessment was improper because it is a discretionary cost that was not orally pronounced at the time of sentencing, and the public defender lien must be reversed because the trial court failed to advise the defendant of his right to contest the amount.”
Establishes the court's holding regarding the impropriety of both the assessment and lien
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarter was convicted and sentenced. At sentencing, the trial court imposed a $100 assessment in favor of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Tru…
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 Discretionary Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PADOVANO, J.
We find no error in the defendant’s conviction, but reverse the assessment of $100.00 in favor of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Trust Fund and the imposition of a public defender lien in the amount of $250.00. The assessment was improper because it is a discretionary cost that was not orally pronounced at the time of sentencing, and the public defender lien must be reversed because the trial court failed to advise the defendant of his right to contest the amount.
After the appeal was filed, the defendant’s appellate counsel filed a timely motion in the trial court under rule 3.800(b) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure challenging both the assessment and the lien. The trial court denied the motion stating that “no such objections were raised by trial counsel at the time of sentence.” This was not a valid reason to deny relief.
Rule 3.800(b) authorizes the defendant to file a motion in the trial court to correct a sentencing error. The motion may be filed within the time for filing a notice of appeal or it may be filed during the pendency of an appeal if it is served no later than the date for service of the defendant’s first brief. In either case, the defendant may assert a claim that was not previously raised by objection at the time of sentencing. A sentencing issue that has not been raised in the trial court either by an objection at the sentencing hearing or in a subsequent rule 3.800(b) motion will not be addressed on direct appeal. See Fla. R.App.P. 9.140(d).
The procedure established by rule 8.800(b) enables the parties to object to sentencing errors that were not apparent at the time of the sentencing hearing. See Amendments to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.111(e) and 3.800 and Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, 9.020(h), 9.U0, and 9.600, 761 So. 2d 1015 (Fla.1999). As a practical matter, the rule also ensures that a trial judge will not be reversed for a sentencing error presented for the first time on appeal. If the trial judge corrects the sentence in response to a rule 8.800(b) motion, the sentencing issue will never ripen into an appellate argument. On the other hand, if the trial court declines to correct a sentencing error identified in a rule 3.800(b) motion, the issue will have been preserved by the filing of the motion, and the appellate court must then address the issue on the merits.
We are obligated to consider the sentencing issues in this case because they were preserved for appellate review by a timely rule 3.800(b) motion. The defendant has shown that the trial court erred in imposing the assessment and lien. Accordingly, we reverse with instructions to eliminate these aspects of the sentence.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
MINER and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
NIX v. State, 84 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…Nor is there any merit to the State’s argument that this issue was not properly preserved for appellate review. Appellant preserved the issue through his rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. See Jackson v. State, 983 So. 2d 562, 574 (Fla.2008); Carter v. State, 791 So. 2d 525, 526-27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). [*426] Statutorily-mandated costs may be imposed without notice and, thus, need not be specifically pronounced at the sentencing hearing. See Bradshaw v. State, 638 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). By contrast, discretio…
-
Lang v. State, 856 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…s payment, because the trial court failed to advise appellant of his right to a hearing to contest the amount, as required by section 938.29(6), Florida Statutes (2001), and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1) (2002). See Carter v. State, 791 So. 2d 525, 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“[T]he public defender lien must be reversed because the trial court failed to advise the defendant of his right to contest the amount.”); Campbell v. State, 745 So. 2d 500, 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (“When a public defender…
-
McLEAN v. State, 870 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ts a court to impose an additional court cost if “it finds that the person has the ability to pay the additional assessment.” McLean timely filed a rule 3.800(b) motion to correct a sentencing error, preserving the issue for appeal. Carter v. State, 791 So. 2d 525, 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Here, the trial court did not consider McLean’s financial resources or orally announce the imposition of the discretionary cost assessed against McLean. In deciding whether to assess the discretionary cost, a court is to…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Amendments TO Fla. Rules OF Crim. Procedure 3.111(e) & 3.800 & Fla. Rules OF App. Procedure 9.020(h), 791 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 2001)