MAURICE DONNELL WARREN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2009-12-08
No. 1D08-4566
KAHN, BENTON, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
23 So. 3d 218 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2009) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. The issue of the appropriate amount of restitution was not properly preserved for appellate review, and no fundamental error is presented. Mapp v. State, 18 So.3d 33 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).

KAHN, BENTON, and CLARK, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Rivera v. State, 34 So. 3d 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
    …at the hearing when the trial court imposed the amount of restitution. Id. Cases citing Mapp have determined that errors regarding the sufficiency of evidence to support restitution amounts did not constitute fundamental error. See Warren v. State, 23 So. 3d 218, 219 (Fla. 1st. DCA 2009); Pilon v. State, 20 So. 3d 992, 993 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). In addition, the Florida Supreme Court has previously stated, “We conclude that an unpreserved error in the assessment of costs cannot be considered a serious, patent…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw