METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, PETITIONER,
v.
THOMAS KNIGHT AND THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, RESPONDENTS
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constitutionality Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The record reflects that the County paid the costs at issue herein. By virtue of having paid the said costs, questions concerning the applicability and constitutionality of section 939.08 Florida Statutes, as it relates to any rights that the County has to approve of costs incurred by a criminal defendant prior to the payment of those costs, in response to a court order to do so, now appear to be moot. In addition, the fact that the bills were paid renders the court’s ruling, concerning the constitutionality of section 939.08 Florida Statutes, superfluous. Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons, the trial court’s order, which declared section 939.08 Florida Statutes unconstitutional and ordered the payment of costs upon approval of the presiding judge, is hereby vacated, thus rendering this appeal subject to being dismissed for mootness.
Appeal dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perez v. State, 717 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…y preserve, and which he, himself, invited. See Pope v. State, 441 So. 2d 1073, 1076 (Fla.1983)(“A party may not invite error and then be heard to complain of that error on appeal”); Lentz v. State, 679 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Buggs v. State, 640 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). For the reasons stated above, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence. . Williams V. State, 110 So. 2d 654 (FIa.1959). . The state also re-argues the propriety of the trial court’s admission of the Williams rule evi…
-
Kendrick Taylor v. State, 695 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…ellant’s argument on appeal that he did not consent to defense counsel’s strategy of admitting his guilt in the armed robbery charges. A party may not make or invite error at trial, and then take advantage of the error on appeal. See Buggs v. State, 640 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). As to appellant’s remaining points on appeal, we affirm without comment. AFFIRM IN PART; REVERSE IN PART AND REMAND FOR A NEW TRIAL. WARNER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.…
-
Sheffield v. Superior Ins. Co., 741 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…now invoked as a reason for a new trial. See Pope v. State, 441 So. 2d 1073, 1076 (Fla.1983) (“A party may not invite error and then be heard to complain of that error on appeal.”); Lentz v. State, 679 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Buggs v. State, 640 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). In denying the motion for hew trial, moreover, the trial judge expressly found that admission of evidence of collateral sources had proven harmless, even if error. On appeal, Ms. [*538] Sheffield has demonstrated no reason to di…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence