R.L.L., A CHILD, 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.
Juvenile's disposition order for felony battery was reversed in part because the written order failed to conform to the trial judge's oral pronouncement of guilt for domestic battery, and court costs were erroneously assessed when adjudication was withheld.
A disposition order must be corrected to reflect the trial court's oral pronouncement of guilt, and court costs cannot be assessed when adjudication is withheld.
[1] A written disposition order in a juvenile delinquency proceeding must be corrected to conform to the trial court's oral pronouncement of the verdict.
[2] Court costs cannot be assessed under Florida Statute § 775.083(2) when adjudication has been withheld.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceR.L.L., a juvenile, was charged with domestic battery in a juvenile petition. The trial judge orally found him guilty of domestic battery, but the wri…
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 Court Costs Assessment cases and more on FLexlaw
R.L.L., a juvenile, appeals a disposition order finding him guilty of felony battery. The State concedes that the disposition order incorrectly states that the appellant was guilty of felony battery although the trial judge orally found him guilty of domestic battery, as charged in the juvenile petition. See, e.g., K.E.H. v. State, 717 So.2d 182, 183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (remanding for correction of written order that failed to conform to trial court’s oral pronouncement). The State also concedes that the trial court erroneously assessed court costs as adjudication had been withheld. See § 775.083(2), Fla. Stat. (2010) (“[CJourt costs shall be assessed and collected in each instance a defendant ... [is] adjudicated delinquent for, a felony, a misdemeanor, or a criminal traffic offense under state law.”).
We have considered appellant’s remaining argument that the trial court erred in finding him guilty where the State’s evidence did not rebut the legal defense of self-defense, but we find no fundamental error in this unpreserved claim. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for entry of a corrected order consistent with this decision.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
MAY, C.J., and GROSS, J., concur.