ERIC MICHAEL CRAPSER, 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 certain statutory fines and costs were improperly assessed and must be corrected on remand.
[1] A discretionary fine must be individually pronounced during sentencing to be validly imposed.
[2] A motion to correct a sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) can render a claim of error moot.
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 intelligenceAppellant was convicted of battery and lewd or lascivious molestation. The trial court assessed several statutory fines and costs, some of which were …
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 Costs Of Prosecution cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm without discussion appellant’s conviction and sentence for battery and lewd or lascivious molestation following a jury trial. Although appellant asserts the order of probation erroneously indicates that he entered a plea of nolo contendere, this claim is moot because the trial court granted appellant’s motion to correct this sentencing error pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). However, the state properly concedes the trial court erred in assessing several statutory fines and costs.
First, the imposition of the $2100 fine pursuant to section 775.083(1), Florida Statutes (2007), the associated surcharge of $105 pursuant to section 938.04, Florida Statutes (2007), and the $20 cost pursuant *795to section 938.06, Florida Statutes (2007), was erroneous because the trial court did not individually pronounce the discretionary $2100 fíne during sentencing. Giles v. State, 103 So.3d 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Nix v. State, 84 So.3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Mallory v. State, 70 So.3d 738 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). On remand, the trial court may reimpose the fíne, surcharge, and cost after providing proper notice and an opportunity to be heard. Giles, 103 So.3d at 1058; Nix, 84 So.3d at 426.
Next, the additional cost imposed pursuant to section 938.05, Florida Statutes (2007), must be reduced from $225 to $200. Clavelle v. State, 80 So.3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Swift v. State, 53 So.3d 394 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). Similarly, the additional cost imposed pursuant to section 938.10(1), Florida Statutes (2007), must be reduced from $151 to $101.
Finally, the $100 mandatory cost of prosecution pursuant to section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes (2008), must be stricken because appellant’s offenses were committed before July 1, 2008, the effective date of the authorizing statute. Sims v. State, 110 So.3d 975, 976 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Massengale v. State, 69 So.3d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED for further proceedings.
ROBERTS, MARSTILLER, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- NIX v. State, 84 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Marvalius Laclut Swift v. State, 53 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
- Sterling S. Mallory v. State, 70 So. 3d 738 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Baldwin v. State, 80 So. 3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Clavelle v. State, 80 So. 3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Massengale v. State, 69 So. 3d 1095 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Giles v. State, 103 So. 3d 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Reeves v. Orange Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 110 So. 3d 975 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)
- Sims v. State, 110 So. 3d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)