ALLEN COLBY GLOVER, 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.
Allen Colby Glover appealed his drug-related convictions and sentences, challenging the imposition of certain court costs. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed his convictions and most of his sentence, but reversed the imposition of a $100 Florida Department of Law Enforcement criminal analysis laboratory fee because the trial court failed to make required findings regarding his ability to pay.
The court affirmed the $2 criminal justice education fee as a mandatory cost but reversed the $100 criminal analysis laboratory fee because the trial court failed to make the statutorily required findings that Glover had the ability to pay and that payment would not prevent his rehabilitation or restitution. The court remanded for the trial court to either strike the cost or reconsider it if proper findings are made.
[1] A $2 criminal justice education fee is a mandatory cost imposed pursuant to section 938.15, Florida Statutes.
[2] A discretionary cost imposed under section 938.25, Florida Statutes, must be stricken if the trial court fails to make written or oral findings concerning the defendant's…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Glover is correct in his assertion. At the time of sentencing, the trial court did not make any written or oral findings concerning Glover's ability to pay; it merely imposed the cost.”
Establishes that the trial court failed to comply with statutory requirements for discretionary cost assessment
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGlover was convicted of drug-related offenses and sentenced to include various court costs. At sentencing, the trial court imposed a $2 criminal justi…
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 Mandatory Court Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Allen Colby Glover appeals his convictions and sentences for drug-related offenses. He also asserts that the trial court erred when it denied, in part, a motion to correct sentencing error which he filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). We affirm Glover’s convictions without further comment. We also affirm his sentences with the exception of the $100 cost imposed pursuant to section 938.25, Florida Statutes (2003), which we reverse.
In the motion to correct sentencing error, Glover claimed that the $2 criminal justice education fee authorized by section 938.15, Florida Statutes (2003), was not a mandatory cost and was improperly imposed. This court has recently concluded that the $2 fee is a mandatory cost. See Waller v. State, 911 So. 2d 226, 227-28 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (en banc). Highlands County has established the “Sheriffs Law Enforcement Education Trust Fund” which is funded in part by the mandatory $2 court cost imposed pursuant to section 938.15.1 We affirm this cost.
In his rule 3.800(b)(2) motion Glover also claimed that the trial court erred when it failed to determine if he had the ability to pay the $100 Florida Department of Law Enforcement criminal analysis laboratory fee under section 938.25. Glover is correct in his assertion. At the time of sentencing, the trial court did not make any written or oral findings concerning Glover’s ability to pay; it merely imposed the cost. Thus, this discretionary cost must be stricken because the trial court did not make the statutorily required findings that Glover had the ability to pay the $100 cost and that payment would not prevent him from being rehabilitated or from making restitution. See Gunn v. State, 818 So. 2d 681, 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); see, e.g., Ayoub v. State, 901 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (discussing section 939.18(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2002), containing cost assessment language similar to section 938.25 and requiring finding of ability to pay); Cook v. State, 896 So. 2d 870, 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (discussing section 939.21, Florida Statutes (2003), containing same cost assessment language as section 938.25 and requiring finding of ability to pay).
We reverse that portion of Glover’s sentence imposing the $100 cost pursuant to section 938.25. On remand, the trial court shall strike this cost from the sentence, but it may reconsider imposition of the cost if it makes the necessary findings required by section 938.25.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
WHATLEY and KELLY, JJ„ Concur. . See Highland County, Fla.Code of Ordinances art. I, § 2-5.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Floyd v. State, 952 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…st in one of the three cases. Accordingly, because the trial court did not make a finding of ability to pay, we reverse and direct the trial court to strike this cost unless, on remand, it makes the necessary findings. See § 938.25; Glover v. State, 921 So. 2d 846, 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). In all other respects, we affirm. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. STRINGER, J., and HAYES, HUGH D., Associate Judge, Concur.…
-
Webster v. State, 998 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…statutorily required inquiry into his ability to pay. See § 938.25, Fla. Stat. (2006). On remand, the trial court may reimpose this cost if it makes the necessary findings. See Floyd v. State, 952 So. 2d 529, 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Glover v. State, 921 So. 2d 846, 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Gunn v. State, 818 So. 2d 681, 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Finally, Webster asserts that the $373 in court costs should be stricken because the record does not contain a precise citation to the statutory authority for impositi…
Authorities Cited
- Ayoub v. State, 901 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Waller v. State, 911 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Freddrick Lee Cook v. State, 896 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Gunn v. State, 818 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Ross v. FLY ME TO THE Moon, LLC, 818 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)