SHANNON STEPHEN, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed DUI manslaughter and leaving-the-scene convictions but reversed and remanded the $225 assessment under section 938.05(1) because the 2005 statute authorized only a $200 fine.
The trial court erred in awarding a $225 assessment under section 938.05(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which authorized only a $200 fine for the offense date of March 26, 2006.
[1] When determining the applicable statutory fine under section 938.05, Florida Statutes, the version in effect at the time of the offense controls, not the version in effec…
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 intelligenceShannon Stephen was convicted of DUI manslaughter and leaving the scene of a crash involving death. The trial court imposed a $225 assessment under se…
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 Leaving The Scene Of An Accident Involving Death cases and more on FLexlaw
Shannon Stephen appeals his convictions and sentences for DUI manslaughter and leaving the scene of a crash involving death. Stephen correctly argues that the trial court erred in awarding $225 under section 938.05(1), Florida Statutes (2005). Stephen preserved this issue by filing a timely Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion. We affirm his remaining issue on appeal without further comment.
We review the statutory requirements for imposing assessments under section *269938.05 de novo. See Chamblee v. State, 93 So.3d 1184, 1185 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), superseded by statute on other grounds, Spear v. State, 109 So.3d 232, 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). The State properly concedes error on this issue. The controlling statute is the version that was in effect at the time of the offense. See Swift v. State, 53 So.3d 394, 395 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). Because the offense date in this case was March 26, 2006, section 938.05, Florida Statutes (2005), controls. As that statute authorizes a fíne of only $200, we reverse the award of $225 and remand for the trial court to enter a corrected order assessing fines and costs.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
NORTHCUTT and WALLACE, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marvalius Laclut Swift v. State, 53 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
- Laronald D. Spear v. State, 109 So. 3d 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Jones v. State, 93 So. 3d 1184 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Derrell J. Chamblee v. State, 93 So. 3d 1184 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)