JEFFREY S. WILLIAMS, 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.
Jeffrey Williams appealed his conviction for aggravated abuse of a disabled adult, challenging a $333 discretionary fine and 5% surcharge imposed at sentencing. The court reversed the fine and surcharge because the trial court failed to orally pronounce them at the sentencing hearing, as required by Florida law, while affirming the conviction and remaining sentencing issues.
A discretionary fine imposed under section 775.083 and any statutory surcharge thereon must be stricken if the discretionary fine was not orally pronounced at sentencing. Because the trial court did not orally pronounce the $333 discretionary fine and 5% surcharge at the sentencing hearing, these amounts cannot stand and must be struck.
[1] A discretionary statutory fine and surcharge must be orally pronounced at sentencing.
[2] A discretionary statutory fine and surcharge that are not orally pronounced at sentencing must be stricken.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“A fine imposed pursuant to section 775.083 is discretionary and must be orally pronounced.”
Establishes the core legal requirement that discretionary fines must be orally pronounced at sentencing to be valid.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn April 21, 2014, Williams was adjudicated guilty of aggravated abuse of a disabled adult and sentenced to seven years' imprisonment. At sentencing, …
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 Motion To Correct Sentencing Error cases and more on FLexlaw
Jeffrey Williams appeals his jury conviction for aggravated abuse of a disabled adult and the imposition of a $333 discretionary fine and 5 percent surcharge. We reverse in part and remand with instructions for the circuit court to strike the discretionary fine pursuant to. section 775.083, Florida Statutes (2011), and the five percent surcharge pursuant to section 938.04, Florida Statutes (2011), totaling $333. We do so because the circuit court failed to orally pronounce this discretionary statutory fine and surcharge at the sentencing hearing. We affirm all other issues raised by Williams without comment.
On April 21, 2014, Williams was adjudicated guilty of aggravated abuse of a disabled adult and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. At sentencing the circuit court orally pronounced the imposition of an aggregate fine of $1002. It is unclear, however, precisely how the circuit court derived that aggregate amount. Importantly, though, the circuit court made no mention of the discretionary statutory fine and surcharge being challenged here. A few weeks later, the circuit court entered the written Judgment for Fines and Costs, where it then became clear that the $1002 aggregate fine was, in part, made up of a discretionary fine and. 5 percent surcharge, totaling $333. . ■
Williams thereafter properly preserved a challenge to the imposition of that $333 fine and 5 percent surcharge by filing a motion to correct sentencing error, arguing in that motion,-as he does here, that the discretionary, statutory fine and surcharge should be struck because the circuit court neglected to specify them in its oral pronouncement. Dadds v. State, 946 So.2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (citing Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)). Although the State agreed with the merits of the *779motion, the circuit court nonetheless denied Williams’s request, to correct that error.
A fine imposed pursuant to section 775.083 is discretionary and must be orally pronounced. Dadds, 946 So.2d at 1130; see also Lamoreaux v. State, 88 So.3d 379, 381 (Fla. 1st DCA. 2012) (“A discretionary fine imposed and the statutory surcharge on the fine must be stricken if the discretionary fine was not orally pronounced at sentencing.” (citing Pullam v. State, 55 So.3d 674, 675 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011))). Because the trial court did not make that oral pronouncement at the sentencing hearing, the discretionary fine and 5 percent surcharge totaling $333 cannot stand. We thus reverse the $333 fine and surcharge and remand with directions that they be stricken. Dadds, 946 So.2d at 1130.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanded with directions to strike the $333 discretionary fine and 5 percent surcharge.
SILBERMAN and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Osterhoudt v. State, 214 So. 3d 550 (Fla. 2017)…the decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Osterhoudt v. State, 182 So. 3d 16 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015), on the ground that it expressly and directly conflicts, with decisions of the Second District Court of Ap [*551] peal in Williams v. State, 198 So. 3d 778 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016), and the First District Court of Appeal in Nix v. State, 84 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), regarding whether trial courts must individually pronounce discretionary fees, costs, and fines at sentencing.1 As explained below, we app…
Authorities Cited
- Clark v. State, 55 So. 3d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Pullam v. State, 55 So. 3d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Dadds v. State, 946 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Lamoreaux v. State, 88 So. 3d 379 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Clarke v. State, 88 So. 3d 379 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)