ROSEME GIBSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ROSEME GIBSON, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
956 So. 2d 557
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2007)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON, J.
AFFIRMED. See Battle v. State, 911 So. 2d 85, 89 (Fla.2005) (noting fundamental error is that which reaches down into the validity of the trial itself such that a guilty verdict could not have been obtained without the assistance of the alleged error); McCray v. State, 416 So. 2d 804, 806 (Fla.1982) (stating “the fact that the defendant might have a better chance of acquittal or a strategic advantage if tried separately does not establish the right to a severance”).
ORFINGER and TORPY, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Houle v. State, 33 So. 3d 822 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…rt also failed to inform appellant of her right to contest this assessment. We find the $500 assessment to be arbitrary, and we strike the assessment of public defender fees without prejudice and remand for an evidentiary hearing. See R.R. v. State, 956 So. 2d 557, 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). On remand, the trial court must advise appellant of her right to contest any lien imposed for public defender fees. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.720(d)(1); Hayes v. State, 25 So. 3d 683, 684-85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). We also reverse the…
-
Mayque Gomez Marin v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)…se is charged . . . ." Id. The trial court can order a larger amount, but only “upon a showing of sufficient proof of higher fees or costs incurred.” Id. This higher amount cannot be arbitrary and must be supported by a factual basis. R.R. v. State, 956 So. 2d 557, 558 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). “This generally requires that the amount of the lien be established by applying a reasonable hourly rate to the time the attorney spent on the case.” Id. And this often requires an evidentiary hearing. See Williams v. State…
Authorities Cited
- Ervin McCRAY v. State, 416 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 1982)
- Battle v. State, 911 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 2005)