BOBBY BERNARD BRADSHAW, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2014-10-14
No. 1D14-0724
Van Nortwick, J., Padovano, J., Marstiller, J.
148 So. 3d 831 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2014) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court reversed a $100 appointed counsel attorney fee imposed without the required statutory hearing, but affirmed the conviction and sentence in all other respects.


Holding

A trial court must inform a defendant of his right to a hearing to dispute an indigent legal assistance lien before imposing an appointed counsel attorney fee under Florida Statute section 938.29.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court must provide a defendant with notice of the right to a hearing to dispute the amount of an indigent legal assistance lien before imposing an appointed couns…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Bobby Bradshaw pleaded nolo contendere to one count each of sale and possession of cocaine in violation of Florida Statutes sections 893.13(1)(a)(1) a…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Bobby Bradshaw seeks review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) of the judgment of and sentence entered against him on one count each of sale and possession of cocaine, in violation of sections 893.13(l)(a)(l), and 893.13(6)(a), Florida Statutes, respectively, following his open plea of nolo contendere. Our review of the record reveals only one reversible error: the imposition in the written sentence of a $100 “Appointed Counsel Attorney Fee,” pursuant to section 938.29, Florida Statutes. The trial court failed to inform the defendant, as required by the statute, of his right to a hearing to dispute the amount of the indigent legal assistance lien created by the imposition of the cost of defense. See § 938.29(l)(a) and (6), Fla. Stat.; Sharpe v. State, 115 So.3d 1021, 1022 (Fla. 1st-DCA 2013); Colson v. State, 114 So.3d 415, 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Youman v. State, 112 So.3d 693, 694 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); DeSalvo v. State, 107 So.3d 1185, 1186-87 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).

Accordingly, we reverse the $100 Appointed Counsel Attorney Fee. On remand, the trial court may reimpose the fee if it follows the correct procedure in doing so. In all other respects, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Talbot v. State, 159 So. 3d 365 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
    …discretionary fine(s) when announcing at sentencing that it would impose $1,522.50 in costs and fines,” and stating that the assessments may be reimposed on remand after giving Appellant notice and following the proper procedure); Bradshaw v. State, 148 So. 3d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“[W]e reverse the [*366] $100 Appointed Counsel Attorney Fee. On remand, the trial court may reimpose the fee if it follows the correct procedure in doing so.”). In all other respects, the judgment and sentences are affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw