DAVIS SMITH, JR., 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.
Trial court's probation condition requiring $5,000 in court costs was invalid because it lacked statutory authority, failed to consider actual costs or defendant's financial circumstances, and exceeded the $205 limit under Florida Statutes § 27.3455(1).
A probation condition imposing $5,000 in court costs must be stricken when the trial court fails to demonstrate actual prosecution costs and consider the defendant's financial resources as required by Florida Statutes § 939.01.
[1] When imposing court costs as a probation condition under Florida Statutes § 939.01, the state attorney must demonstrate the actual amount of prosecution costs and the tri…
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 intelligenceAt sentencing, the trial judge orally imposed a $5,000 court costs condition without statutory reference, evidence of actual costs, or consideration o…
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 Financial Ability To Pay cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
At a sentencing proceeding in open court, the trial judge orally stated that as a condition of probation, the defendant was to pay $5,000 in “costs” without reference to any statutory authority, without considering evidence as to the amount of actual costs, and without considering the financial circumstances of the defendant. Paragraph ten of the written probation order directs payment of the $5,000 courts costs “in accordance with F.S. § 27.3455(1), as directed by your Probation Officer.”
Costs authorized by section 27.3455(1), Florida Statutes, are limited to $205 in felony cases. The trial court was authorized under section 939.01(1), Florida Statutes, to enter a judgment for the costs of prosecution against the defendant as a convicted person notwithstanding that formal adjudication of guilt was withheld pursuant to section 948.01(3), Florida Statutes. Clinger v. State, 533 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). However, under this statutory authority, the state attorney must demonstrate the amount of the cost of prosecution (§ 939.01(6), Fla.Stat.) and the trial court must consider the financial resources of the defendant (§ 939.01(5), Fla.Stat.). Because the record on appeal fails to show these prerequisite procedural steps were taken, the condition of probation requiring the payment of $5,000 as court costs is stricken and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
CONDITION OF PROBATION RE COURT COSTS STRICKEN; CAUSE REMANDED.
ORFINGER and COBB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Abel Oliveros Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…th DCA 1994); Hollingsworth v. State, 622 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Smith v. State, 606 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), review denied, 618 So. 2d 211 (Fla.1993). . See also Richter v. State, 597 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Smith v. State, 543 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). . We are aware that these statutory requirements are burdensome for the trial courts. We understand the trial court’s temptation to use a flat fee for the state attorney in every case instead of requiring formal documentation.…
-
Williams v. State, 596 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…s.” [*759] § 939.01, Fla.Stat. (1991). However, before assessing such costs the court must consider both “the amount of the costs incurred” and “the financial resources of the defendant.” § 939.01(5), Fla.Stat. (1991); and see, e.g., Smith v. State, 543 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Polk County’s administrative order attempts no such individualized determination. In any event, we cannot construe section 939.01 as extending to such ancillary costs of “prosecution” as judicial salaries, clerical and reportori…
-
Tennie v. State, 593 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…lso note that in imposing costs of prosecution under section 939.01(6), Florida Statutes (1989), the state attorney must demonstrate the amount of such costs and the trial court must consider the financial resources of the defendant. Smith v. State, 543 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Reversed and remanded for a new trial. RYDER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Clinger v. State, 533 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)