CHADRICK ANTWAN RUFFIN
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 improperly assesses court costs when it assesses multiple costs per case rather than a single cost assessment per case under Florida Statute 938.05.
[1] Court costs under Florida Statute 938.05 must be assessed once per case, not separately for each count of conviction.
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“requiring additional costs assessment per case, rather than per count”
The court cited Fla. Stat. § 938.05 (2023) to explain the proper method of assessing court costs
Chadrick Antwan Ruffin was convicted of multiple counts in Marion County Circuit Court. The trial court imposed sentences across eight counts and asse…
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
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders* appeal, having independently reviewed the because the court assessed two additional court costs, we reverse cost and remand with instructions for the court to strike that assessment from the costs order. See § 938.05, Fla. Stat. (2023) (requiring additional costs assessment per case, rather than per count); Ayos v. State, 275 So. 3d 178, 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). In addition, we instruct the court, on remand, to amend the written sentence to conform with the oral pronouncement in two respects: first, to specify that the sentences imposed for counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are to run concurrently with each other; and second, to days of credit for time served for count 3 (in addition to the other counts already specified in the written sentence). Appellant need not be present for these ministerial actions. Ayos, 275 So. 3d at 183.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.
MAKAR, HARRIS, and PRATT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harris v. State, 291 So. 3d 962 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)…ng order to impose only the mandatory $100.00 amount because the services of a local crime lab were used to investigate Harris’s case. See id. Appellant need not be present when the trial court makes this ministerial correction. See Ayos v. State, 275 So. 3d 178, 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with instructions. GERBER, KLINGENSMITH, JJ., and NUTT, JAMES, Associate Judge, concur.…
-
Gardner v. State, 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2344 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)…or sentenced for an offense listed in those statutes. On remand, these costs must be stricken from Gardner's sentences and the corresponding civil judgment. See Ingalls v. State, 45 Fla. L. Weekly D2344 (Fla. 4th DCA Oct. 14, 2020); Ayos v. State, 275 So. 3d 178, 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019); Gay v. State, 94 So. 3d 676, 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Affirmed; remanded with instructions. KHOUZAM, C.J., and NORTHCUTT and BLACK, JJ., Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Ayos v. State, 275 So. 3d 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)