NORRIS ROGERS, 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 imposition of costs without due process is reversible error, and a written sentence must conform to the oral pronouncement.
The defendant was convicted and sentenced, but the written sentencing order for one count included probation not mentioned in the oral pronouncement. …
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 Written Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment of conviction and sentence but reverse the imposition of costs pursuant to section 27.3455 Fla.Stat. (1987) because the court did not afford the defendant due process before imposing these costs. We remand for hearing of this issue without prejudice to the state’s right to attempt to obtain a cost judgment upon hearing. Wood v. State, 544 So. 2d 1004 (Fla.1989) (The failure to provide the basic requirements of adequate notice and meaningful hearing prior to the assessment of court costs constitutes fundamental error); Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla.1984); Isaiah v. State, 522 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART with instructions.
DELL, WALDEN and POLEN, JJ., concur. UPON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of our opinion filed on March 14, 1990, page 1, in light of appellant’s motion, we are satisfied that clarification and some modification is in order. As to Count V it appears that the trial court sentenced appellant to five and one-half years’ imprisonment and specifically stated orally that no term of probation was imposed as to this count. However, the written order of probation imposed five and one-half years of imprisonment followed by five years of probation. Without objection by appellee, the period of probation under Count V must be eliminated so as to make the written sentence conform to the trial court’s earlier oral pronouncement.
We remand to the trial court with instructions to make the change in the written order as herein outlined. Robinson v. State, 548 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Sirmons v. State, 405 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Sandstrom v. State, 390 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
The motion is
GRANTED.
DELL, WALDEN and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Decker v. Lyle, 848 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…father argues that we should let the custody- order stand in - order to avoid “unnecessary upheaval in the minor child’s life.” We are sensitive to the need to minimize disruptions to the custodial arrangements for the child. See Potter v. Haffner, 561 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). [*504] Therefore, while we reverse the trial court’s order granting temporary custody of the minor child to the father and remand this case to the trial court for a further hearing on this issue, temporary custody of the child sh…
-
Griffith v. Griffith, 627 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…en a substantial change in circumstances before modifying the final order of custody is not applicable here because the order appealed is a nonfinal order placing temporary custody of the children with the noncustodial parent. See Potter v. Haffner, 561 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The trial court was not making a final determination of custody. In a temporary custody order, the trial court determines the best place for the children until the court makes the final decision regarding custody. The courts gene…
-
Mahmoud Ismail Ayyash v. Ayyash, 700 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…. . Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Silvestri v. Silvestri, 309 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Ebaugh v. Ebaugh, 282 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). . See Buckhalt v. McGhee, 632 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Potter v. Haffner, 561 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Palmore v. Sidoti, 472 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jenkins v. State, 444 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1984)
- Mays v. State, 519 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1988)
- Wood v. State, 544 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1989)
- Sandstrom v. State, 390 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Isaiah v. State, 522 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
- Schilling v. Schilling, 405 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Sirmons v. State, 405 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Drexel C. Robinson v. State, 548 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)