JOHNNY MACK VICK, JR., 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.
Johnny Mack Vick, Jr. appealed his felony battery conviction and sentence. The appellate court affirmed the conviction and sentence but reversed two cost impositions by the trial court due to lack of statutory authority and failure to provide notice of appellate rights.
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence but reversed the imposition of $664 in unidentified costs and the $150 public defender lien. The $150 prosecution cost issue was not preserved for appellate review due to lack of contemporaneous objection at sentencing.
[1] A trial court may impose a departure sentence on remand if it did not realize it was imposing a departure sentence at the initial sentencing, provided proper contemporane…
[2] A trial court must reference statutory authority when imposing costs on a defendant.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The statutory authority for all costs imposed, whether they are mandatory or discretionary, must be cited in the written order.”
Establishes the requirement that courts must identify statutory basis for all costs imposed
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceVick was convicted of felony battery. At sentencing, the trial court imposed a lump sum of $984 in mandatory court costs, of which $664 lacked identif…
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
Johnny Mack Vick, Jr., appeals his conviction and sentence for felony battery. We affirm his conviction and sentence without comment. However, we reverse two costs imposed by the trial court, and we remand for further proceedings limited to those costs.
Vick argues that the trial court erred because its written order imposed a lump sum of $6641 in “mandatory court costs” without identifying the statutory basis for those costs. These costs were not mentioned at the sentencing hearing and are not explained in the written order. We have been unable to decipher their basis. Vick preserved this sentencing error by filing a motion to correct sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). The trial court did not rule on the motion within 60 days; thus, it is deemed denied. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B), (b)(1)(B). “The statutory authority for all costs imposed, whether they are mandatory or discretionary, must be cited in the written order.” Kirby v. State, 695 So.2d 889, 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Therefore, we strike the $664 in unidentified costs. On remand, the trial court may reimpose these costs if it provides statutory authority for their assessment.
Vick also argues that the trial court erred in orally imposing a $150 cost of prosecution because the cost was not requested by the State and because no supporting documentation was presented for this cost. However, this issue was not preserved for appellate review. See Rivera v. State, 34 So.3d 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (holding that imposition of prosecution costs was not preserved for appellate review because the defendant did not raise a contemporaneous objection at the sentencing hearing when the trial court announced that it was imposing those costs).
Finally, Vick argues that the trial court erred in orally imposing a $150 lien *953to the public defender’s office without giving him notice of his right to a hearing to contest the amount of the lien. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.720(d)(1) provides that a defendant must be advised at the time of sentencing of his right to a hearing to contest the amount of any public defender lien imposed. See also § 938.29(5), Fla. Stat. (2007). Because Vick was not advised of his right to a hearing to contest the amount of the public defender lien, we reverse and direct the trial court to strike the lien. See McMillan v. State, 8 So.Sd 1237, 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (reversing public defender fee where trial court did not advise the defendant that he had a right to contest the fee at a hearing); Webster v. State, 998 So.2d 655, 656-57 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (same). On remand, Vick shall have thirty days from this court’s mandate to file a written objection to the public defender lien amount assessed. See Webster, 998 So.2d at 657. If Vick files an objection, the trial court shall hold a hearing; if he fails to timely object, the trial court may reimpose the lien. Id.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
SILBERMAN and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carter v. State, 173 So. 3d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…7) (citing Smith v. State, 686 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)). We strike both costs and remand; on remand, the trial court may re-impose those costs in the appropriate amounts if it provides statutory authority for their assessment. See Vick v. State, 37 So. 3d 951, 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). Next, the trial court imposed a $65 cost pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes, but failed to cite the applicable ordinance. Pursuant to Swift v. State, 53 So. 3d 394, 395 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (citing Ayoub v. State,…
-
Neal v. State, 62 So. 3d 1277 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…of sentence.”). As such, we reverse the imposition of the [*1278] public defender’s lien and remand to the trial court with instructions to strike the lien and afford Neal the opportunity to properly object to the amount imposed. See Vick v. State, 37 So. 3d 951, 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). Additionally, the revocation order contains an error on its face in that it indicates that Neal admitted the alleged violations of his probation. This is incorrect as a hearing was held on the allegations. On remand, the tr…
-
Clavelle v. State, 80 So. 3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…llant was given notice and an opportunity to be heard on this charge, as required under section 938.29(5). This assessment was therefore premature, and on remand the appellant should be given an opportunity to contest this charge. See Vick v. State, 37 So. 3d 951 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Snowden v. State, 685 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). The court also imposed a $50 assessment for the Crimes Compensation Trust Fund, and a $3 assessment for an Additional Court Cost Clearing Trust Fund, with the court citing se…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rivera v. State, 34 So. 3d 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Kirby v. State, 695 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Berenger v. State, 998 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)