ALFRED M. HOWARD, 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 the trial court erred in imposing costs of prosecution without documentation, even though the defendant did not object at sentencing.
The defendant was convicted of failure to register as a sexual offender. The State requested $25 in costs of prosecution without providing documentati…
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 Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(B) cases and more on FLexlaw
[*765] CANADY, Judge.
Alfred M. Howard appeals his conviction and sentence for failure to register as a sexual offender. We affirm Howard’s conviction without comment. However, the State concedes that the trial court erred in imposing $25 in costs of prosecution because the State failed to document its request for costs. See Hill v. State, 845 So. 2d 310, 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Tucker v. State, 832 So. 2d 840, 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).
Although Howard did not object at sentencing to the imposition of these costs, he did raise the issue in his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). Because the trial court did not rule on the motion within sixty days, it is deemed denied. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B); Lopez v. State, 905 So. 2d 1045, 1047 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
The State filed a “cost motion” prior to sentencing, but the record contains no evidence supporting the request for costs. Thus, the State failed to meet its burden of demonstrating the amount of costs incurred, as required by section 938.27(4), Florida Statutes (2004).
Accordingly, we strike the $25 costs of prosecution and remand to the trial court with directions that such costs may be reimposed following the State’s production of the required documentation. See Hill, 845 So. 2d at 311; Tucker, 832 So. 2d at 841.
Conviction affirmed; costs award stricken; remanded with instructions.
ALTENBERND and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Phillips v. State, 942 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…urt’s consideration, defense counsel has nothing to object to. Because the trial court was without evidence of any amount of investigative costs, it erred by entering an order imposing an award of those costs upon Ms. Phillips. See Howard v. State, 920 So. 2d 764, 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (reversing imposition of cost of prosecution because State failed to document its request for costs); Hill v. State, 845 So. 2d 310, 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (reversing award of investigative costs where State concedes error be…
-
Hall v. State, 932 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…an officer without violence. We affirm Hall’s conviction without comment. However, the State concedes that the trial court erred in imposing $80 in costs of prosecution because the State failed to document its request for costs. See Howard v. State, 920 So. 2d 764, 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Hill v. State, 845 So. 2d 310, 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Tucker v. State, 832 So. 2d 840, 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Because the State failed to meet its burden of demonstrating the amount of costs incurred as required by secti…
-
Watts v. State, 973 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…nd several costs by filing a motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). Because the court did not rule on the motion within sixty days, it is deemed denied. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B); Howard v. State, 920 So. 2d 764, 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Watts argues that the trial court erred in imposing a $65 county court cost pursuant to section 939.185(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2004). This statute authorizes the imposition of county court costs to crimes committed after…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Walden v. State, 905 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Hill v. State, 845 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Tucker v. State, 832 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)