AARON ROGERS
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.
Trial courts may impose investigatory costs only when requested by the State or agency involved, and revocation orders must accurately reflect the conditions of community control that were actually violated and admitted to by the defendant.
[1] Trial courts may impose investigatory costs under section 938.27, Florida Statutes, only when requested by the State or agency involved.
[2] A revocation order must accurately reflect the specific conditions of community control that were actually violated and admitted to by the defendant.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“Trial courts may impose investigatory costs, but only when requested by the State or agency involved.”
Court's statement of the legal standard for imposing investigative costs under section 938.27, Florida Statutes
Aaron Rogers appealed the revocation of his community control and sentences in two consolidated cases. In one case, the revocation order listed condit…
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 Community Control Conditions cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
AARON ROGERS,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-1751
5D19-1753 STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed January 24, 2020
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, Matthew M. Foxman, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Edward J. Weiss and Kathryn Rollison Radtke, Assistant Public Defenders, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marjorie Vincent-Tripp, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated Anders1 appeals, Aaron Rogers challenges the order revoking community control entered by the trial court in one of his cases below, together
First, in case number 2017-300370-CF, Rogers was alleged to have violated four conditions of his community control. He entered into a plea agreement with the State, admitting to the charged violations and approving an agreed-upon prison sentence. The trial court accepted Rogers’s plea and imposed sentence consistent with the parties’ agreement. However, the order revoking community control listed two conditions that were neither charged nor admitted to by Rogers as having been violated, and also did not include two of the conditions that Rogers did admit to having violated. Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to enter an amended order of revocation reflecting the correct conditions of community control that Rogers violated. See Reyes v. State, 44 So. 3d 216, 216 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (affirming revocation of probation and resultant sentence, but remanding for the trial court to correct the written order to accurately reflect the condition of probation violated).
Second, in case number 2017-304677-CF, the trial court ordered Rogers to pay $100 for costs of investigation under section 938.27, Florida Statutes (2017), to the Volusia County Sheriff’s Office. This cost was not part of the written plea agreement between Rogers and the State. It was not requested by the prosecutor, nor was it orally pronounced nor, for that matter, mentioned by the court when it imposed the negotiated sentence.
“Trial courts may impose investigatory costs, but only when requested by the State or agency involved.” See Desrosiers v. State, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2951 (Fla. 4th DCA Dec. 11, 2019) (citing Chambers v. State, 217 So. 3d 210, 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.
ORFINGER, LAMBERT, and TRAVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Chambers v. State, 217 So. 3d 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Reyes v. State, 44 So. 3d 216 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Rogers v. State, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2951 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)