MICHAEL ANGUILLE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court errs when it imposes a sentence for misdemeanor cannabis possession exceeding the statutory maximum, duplicates court costs under the same statutory provision for a companion felony, and assesses costs under the traffic statute when no traffic offense was charged.
[1] A trial court lacks authority to impose a sentence for misdemeanor cannabis possession that exceeds the maximum sentence provided by statute.
[2] Court costs may not be imposed under the same statutory provision for both a companion felony charge and a misdemeanor charge in the same case.
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 intelligenceMichael Anguille was convicted of misdemeanor cannabis possession and a companion felony charge. The trial court imposed a sentence for the cannabis o…
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
On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court erred by imposing: (1) a sentence for misdemeanor possession of cannabis in excess of the statutory maximum; (2) court costs for that offense under section 938.05(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2017), after imposing costs under the same statutory provision for a companion felony charge in the case; and (3) costs under section 318.18, Florida Statutes (2017), when no traffic offense was charged in the case. Appellee confesses error, and does not oppose reversal of the sentence on the cannabis charge and reversal of the order imposing the contested costs. After reviewing the record, we agree that the trial court erred. We reverse the sentence and contested costs imposed by the trial court for the cannabis charge and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded. CIKLIN, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.