STEVEN DOUGLAS MASENGALE, 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 a fine not orally pronounced at sentencing must be stricken, and a surcharge based on that invalid fine must also be stricken.
The defendant challenged his conviction and sentence. The written judgment included a fine and a cost that were not orally pronounced at sentencing.…
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 Discretionary Fines cases and more on FLexlaw
STRINGER, Judge.
Steven Masengale challenges his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery on numerous grounds. We affirm Masen-gale’s conviction and sentence without comment. However, on the State’s concession of error in response to Masengale’s motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), we strike a fine and a cost that were improperly imposed and remand for entry of a corrected judgment for fines and costs.
The written judgment for fines and costs entered by the trial court includes a $175 fine under section 775.083, Florida Statutes (2005). Fines under section 775.083 are discretionary and must be orally pronounced at sentencing. Dadds v. State, 946 So. 2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111, 116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). In this case, however, the trial court did not orally pronounce this fine at the sentencing hearing. Therefore, this fine must be stricken. Dadds, 946 So. 2d at 1130.
The written judgment for fines and costs also includes a $20 mandatory cost for the Crime Stoppers Trust Fund pursuant to section 938.06, Florida Statutes (2005). Section 938.06(1) authorizes this cost as “an additional surcharge” to “any fine prescribed by law.” Here, because the $175 fine was not properly imposed, the trial court could not impose the additional $20 surcharge under section 938.06. Dadds, 946 So. 2d at 1130; Kimball v. State, 933 So. 2d 1285, 1287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Therefore, this cost must be stricken as well.
Affirmed but remanded for entry of a corrected judgment for fines and costs.
WHATLEY and CASANUEVA, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Dadds v. State, 946 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Kimball v. State, 933 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Hughes v. State, 933 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)