STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
CHRISTOPHE A. CREMERS
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.
Evidentiary errors regarding the sufficiency of proof for prosecution costs cannot be corrected through a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motion.
[1] Evidentiary errors concerning the sufficiency of proof of prosecution costs are not cognizable in a motion to correct sentencing error under Florida Rule of Criminal Proc…
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“Pursuant to section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes, a court shall impose $100 as the costs of prosecution for a felony and may impose a greater amount upon sufficient proof of such costs. However, an objection to the sufficiency of the proof must be made contemporaneously with the assessment of costs.”
Court explains the statutory requirement for prosecution costs and the procedural requirement for challenging them
A defendant was sentenced and assessed $200 in prosecution costs. The trial court subsequently granted his motion under Rule 3.800(b)(2) to reduce the…
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 Florida Rule Of Appellate Procedure 9.140 cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellant,
v.
CHRISTOPHE A. CREMERS,
Appellee.
No. 4D19-3723
[April 28, 2021]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Gary L. Sweet, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562016CF002993A.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Paul Patti, III, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Christine C. Geraghty, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION PER CURIAM. We grant the appellee’s motion for clarification, withdraw our opinion, and substitute the following opinion in its place. The State appeals an order entered pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) on defendant’s motion to correct his sentence reducing the costs of prosecution assessed from $200 to $100.1 On
2
appeal, the defendant concedes error, because he affirmatively told the court at the sentencing hearing that he had no objection to the imposition of these costs after the State requested them. Pursuant to section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes, a court shall impose $100 as the costs of prosecution for a felony and may impose a greater amount upon sufficient proof of such costs. However, an objection to the sufficiency of the proof must be made contemporaneously with the assessment of costs. Because the proper documentation of the costs of prosecution is an evidentiary error in the sentencing process, it cannot be preserved through a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. See Rivera v. State, 34 So. 3d 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); see also Mapp v. State, 71 So. 3d 776 (Fla. 2011) (finding that insufficiency of the evidence at a restitution hearing is not cognizable under rule 3.800(b)). Therefore, the court erred in granting relief. We reverse and remand for reinstatement of the original judgment for costs including $200 in prosecution costs. Reversed and remanded. WARNER, MAY and ARTAU, JJ., concur.
* * * Final Upon Release; No Motion For Rehearing Will Be Entertained.
sentencing, they stipulated to the facts, and the issue presented in this case is one of law.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rivera v. State, 34 So. 3d 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Mapp v. State, 71 So. 3d 776 (Fla. 2011)