JAMES POWELL, 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.
Powell, acquitted of murder by reason of temporary insanity, appealed the trial court's denial of his request to tax expert witness fees and deposition costs as recoverable costs against the county. The court held that reasonable expert witness fees are taxable costs for an acquitted non-indigent defendant under Florida law, but deposition costs and other expenses are not.
The court held that reasonable expert witness fees are taxable costs against the county for an acquitted non-indigent defendant, applying reciprocal fairness since counties can tax such fees against convicted defendants. However, deposition costs and other expenses are not taxable as costs under the applicable statutory framework.
[1] A defendant acquitted by reason of temporary insanity may seek reimbursement for reasonable expert witness fees and expenses as taxable costs against the county.
[2] Statutory authority exists for the reimbursement of costs to an acquitted or discharged defendant, with the determination of taxable costs left to the courts.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“There is both constitutional and statutory authority for the reimbursement of costs to an acquitted or discharged defendant. The determination of which costs may be taxed has been left to the courts.”
Establishes the foundational principle that acquitted defendants have a right to recover costs, with courts determining which costs qualify.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePowell was charged with murder and found not guilty by reason of temporary insanity. He sought to recover witness fees and expenses for his expert wit…
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 Deposition Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant Powell, found not guilty of murder by reason of temporary insanity, argues that the trial court erred in not assessing the witness fees and expenses of his expert witnesses, and the costs of deposing these and other witnesses, as taxable costs against the county.
As we noted in Doran v. State, Fla.App. 2d 1974, 296 So. 2d 86:
“There is both constitutional and statutory authority for the reimbursement of costs to an acquitted or discharged defendant. The determination of which costs may be taxed has been left to the courts.”
‡ #
“There are many expenses which one may incur because he is charged with a crime. Yet, only those items reasonably within the scope of statutory authority are taxable.” (Emphasis supplied)
Certainly, Fla.Stat. § 939.06 (1973) establishes a general policy which prohibits the imposition upon an acquitted defendant of any costs or fees of the court or any ministerial office incurred in connection with his prosecution. Wood v. City of Jacksonville, Fla.App. 1st 1971, 248 So. 2d 176. And § 939.07 provides for the payment of the witness costs of an acquitted or discharged defendant “as is prescribed for the payment of costs incurred by the county in the prosecution of such cases.”
Reasonable fees for expert witnesses are authorized and taxable as costs in civil cases, Fla.Stat. § 90.231 (1973), and are statutorily authorized in criminal cases under certain circumstances. For instance, Fla.Stat. § 914.06 provides “reasonable compensation” may he taxable as costs when "in a felony case, on motion of the state or an indigent defendant,” the court requires the attendance of an expert witness whose testimony is found relevant to the issues of the case.1
Since under § 914.06 the county could tax the reasonable compensation of its expert witnesses as costs against a convicted defendant, we think that an acquitted, non-indigent defendant may do likewise against the county. Thus, we remand this case for reconsideration of the costs of expert witnesses fees, but affirm the trial court’s ruling as to deposition costs and other expenses.
Affirmed in part. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur. . Florida Statute § 918.11 (1973) additionally provides:
“Expert witnesses appointed, by the court to determine the mental condition of a defendant in a criminal ease shall be allowed reasonable fees for services rendered as witnesses, which shall be paid by the county where the indictment was found or the information or affidavit was filed. The fees shall be taxed as costs in the case.” (Emphasis supplied) (See, also, RCrP 3.210.)
PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s petition for rehearing points out that the trial court did not make a determination as to whether or not the depositions, for which appellant seeks costs, served a useful purpose in the appellant’s defense of the charge. If upon remand the trial court finds that such depositions served a useful purpose in appellant’s defense, the costs attendant thereto shall be allowed appellant as taxable costs.
In all other respects the original opinion stands as the opinion of this court.
HOBSON, A. C. J., GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bothwell v. State, 450 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…which is ambiguous as to who is responsible for payment of the fee. Since defendant cannot be responsible by law under section 939.06, we direct the court to amend its order to provide for payment of the fee by the county. § 939.07; Powell v. State, 314 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Accordingly, since the original order awarding defendant costs has become final and nonappealable, the March 9 order requiring repayment was void. Hence, the appeal from that order is rendered nugatory. However, we affirm the or…
-
Sawyer v. State, 570 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…motion to dismiss the appeal as being one from a nonappealable, nonfinal order. Sawyer responded that this court had previously considered similar orders by plenary appeal. See Bothwell v. State, 450 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Powell v. State, 314 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Following Orange County v. Davis, 414 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), we deny the motion to dismiss, and treat the notice of appeal as a petition for the issuance of a writ of mandamus. We do not view this decision to be in confl…
-
Volusia Cnty. v. Carrin, 666 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…1991). The appealed order in this case is thus unlike Orange County v. Davis, 414 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), in which the order followed the statutory scheme. . See, for example, §§ 939.15 and 951.04, Fla. Stat. (1993). . See Powell v. State, 314 So. 2d 788, 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975) ("§ 939.07 provides for the payment of witness costs of an acquitted or discharged defendant....”).…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wood v. City OF Jacksonville, 248 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Doran v. State, 296 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)