DARIUS BOYD, 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 appellate court affirmed most of the appellant's convictions and sentences but reversed and remanded on a minor sentencing issue regarding investigative costs. The court found the trial court erred by imposing these costs without proper documentation or a clear ruling on their removal.
The court held that the imposition of $128 in investigative costs was erroneous. The appellate court reversed and remanded for the trial court to strike these costs and enter amended judgments and sentences.
[1] A conviction will be affirmed where an Anders brief identifies only a minor sentencing error and the appellate court finds no other grounds for reversal.
[2] Investigative costs imposed by a trial court are erroneous absent evidence in the record of a request or supporting documentation from the investigating agency.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“We affirm all three convictions without comment, but we reverse and remand on the minor sentencing issue.”
This quote summarizes the court's overall decision on the convictions and the specific sentencing issue.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDarius Boyd was convicted of DUI manslaughter, driving with a suspended license, and resisting an officer. His counsel filed an Anders brief, identify…
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 Investigative Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
CANADY, Judge.
Darius Boyd appeals his convictions for DUI manslaughter; driving while license suspended, revoked, or cancelled; and obstructing or resisting an officer without violence. Counsel for Boyd filed an An-ders
brief identifying a minor sentencing error. We affirm all three convictions without comment, but we reverse and remand on the minor sentencing issue. See In re Appellate Court Response to Anders Briefs, 581 So. 2d 149 (Fla.1991); Diaz v. State, 901 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
Boyd’s counsel correctly argues that the trial court’s imposition of $128 in investigative costs was erroneous because there is no evidence in the record of a request or supporting documentation from the investigating agency. See § 938.27(1), Fla. Stat. (2001); Ortiz v. State, 884 So. 2d 77, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Boyd preserved this issue by filing a motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), in which he challenged $450 in court costs and $128 in investigative costs. On October 7, 2004, the trial court denied the motion “in part, as to the investigative costs” and granted the motion “in part, as to the Fine/Court Costs.” However, on October 8, 2004, the trial court entered an order vacating the judgment lien previously imposed “in the amount of $578.00,” an amount which included the $128 in investigative costs. Be cause the trial court’s rule 3.800(b)(2) order is inconsistent with the order vacating the judgment lien and because the trial court did not strike the investigative costs from Boyd’s sentences, we reverse and remand for the trial court to strike the investigative costs and enter amended judgments and sentences. See Diaz, 901 So. 2d at 311; Ortiz, 884 So. 2d at 78. Boyd’s sentences are affirmed in all other aspects.
Convictions affirmed; sentences affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
WALLACE, J., and DANAHY, PAUL W., Senior Judge, 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
-
Odom v. State, 15 So. 3d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…f so, then pursuant to Jackson, the absence of a timely objection at the revocation hearing required Appellant to preserve the issue by filing a post-sentence motion under rule 3.800(b)(2), which he did. Jackson, 983 So. 2d at 567-68; Boyd v. State, 912 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (concluding that appellant preserved issue challenging the evidentiary basis for imposition of $450 in court costs and $128 in investigative costs by filing a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion); Jones v. State, 898 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 2…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- In re App. Court Response to Anders Briefs, 581 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 1991)
- Ortiz v. State, 884 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Bass v. State, 901 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- Diaz v. State, 901 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)