MARIO ORTIZ, 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.
The court held that costs for prosecution and investigation cannot be imposed without express requests and supporting documentation from the specific agency.
Mario Ortiz was convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm. The trial court imposed prosecution and investigative costs without proper requests or…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
STRINGER, Judge.
Mario Ortiz seeks review of the trial court’s judgment and sentence adjudicating Ortiz guilty of aggravated battery with a firearm, causing great bodily harm. This is an Anders1 appeal raising five issues. We affirm without comment four of the five issues. As to the fifth issue, we find that the trial court erroneously imposed costs of prosecution and investigation in the absence of proper requests and supporting documentation. Ortiz preserved this issue by filing a motion to correct illegal sentence, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b).
Costs for prosecution and investigation imposed under section 938.27(1), Florida Statutes (2001), “must be expressly requested by a specific agency with adequate supporting documentation.” Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111, 114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); see also Taylor v. State, 821 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Ortiz asserts, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred when it imposed $150 for prosecution costs and $130 for investigative costs without the proper requests and supporting documentation from the State.
Accordingly, we reverse the imposition of prosecution and investigative costs and remand for the trial court to strike the costs. We affirm Ortiz’s judgment and sentence in all other aspects, and the costs may be reimposed on remand if the procedural safeguards required in Reyes are met. See Taylor, 821 So. 2d at 405. We note, however, that the expense likely to be incurred by obtaining Ortiz’s presence for a new hearing may outweigh the costs sought by the State.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
CASANUEVA and WALLACE, JJ., Concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Maestas v. State, 76 So. 3d 991 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…n part, and Reversed and Remanded in part. GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur. . Maestas filed a motion to correct sentencing error, pursuant to rule 3.800, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, thus preserving this issue for appeal. See Ortiz v. State, 884 So. 2d 77, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (holding that appellant preserved this issue by filing a rule 3.800(b) motion). However, the trial court entered its order, denying Maestas’ rule 3.800 motion, but lowering the additional $25 cost to $15, more than sixty days…
-
Ortiz v. State, 905 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…ffective assistance when she neglected to raise this issue. We therefore grant the petition and allow Ortiz a belated appeal on this issue only. Ortiz was convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm causing great bodily harm. See Ortiz v. State, 884 So. 2d 77, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Ortiz’s conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. Id. Ortiz was convicted as charged. At trial, Ortiz claimed that he was acting in self-defense when he shot the victim. The jury instruction on the justifiable use of deadly f…
-
Arron Felton v. State, 939 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…iff. The State also correctly concedes that this was error. To impose costs under section 938.27, Florida Statutes (2003), the agency expending the costs must specifically request reimbursement and provide documentation to the court. Ortiz v. State, 884 So. 2d 77, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). No such request or documentation was made or provided. We therefore reverse the imposition of these costs. STONE, POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Taylor v. State, 821 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)