RESTITUTO MARTINEZ, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in imposing restitution and court costs without following statutory requirements and providing notice.
Restituto Martinez appealed his judgment of guilt for aggravated battery, specifically challenging the imposition of restitution and court costs.…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
HALL, Judge.
Restituto Martinez appeals that part of his judgment of guilt for aggravated battery requiring him to pay restitution and court costs. We reverse.
Upon review of the record we find that the appellant correctly argues that the trial court erred in imposing restitution without complying with the requirements of section 775.089(6), Florida Statutes (1985), in imposing court costs without providing the appellant advance notice and an opportunity to be heard as is required by Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984), and in failing to cite statutory authority for either assessment.
Accordingly, we affirm the appellant’s judgment and sentence but strike that part of the judgment imposing restitution and remand for reimposition of restitution upon compliance with section 775.089(6). We also strike that part of the appellant’s judgment imposing court costs without prejudice to the state to seek to reimpose them upon compliance with Jenkins. Reversed and remanded with directions consistent with this opinion.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.