BILLY DALE SCHIMMEL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2006-10-30
No. 1D04-1143
ERVIN, BARFIELD, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
940 So. 2d 584 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We summarily affirm all issues raised in Billy Dale Schimmel’s appeal from his convictions and sentences on multiple counts of fraud except that relating to the denial of his motion to correct a sentencing error, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), challenging the trial court’s imposition of a public-defender lien, authorized by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1). The court erred by ordering appellant to pay the amount of the lien without first affording him notice of the right to contest the amount, as required by the latter rule. See Campbell v. State, 745 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). This portion of the sentence is reversed with instructions that appellant be allowed a hearing as to the amount of the lien sought to be imposed.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

ERVIN, BARFIELD, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Pride v. State, 944 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
    …the trial court committed a sentencing error contrary to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1) by imposing a public-defender lien without affording him notice of the right to contest the amount. We agree and reverse. See Schimmel v. State, 940 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Wagner v. McDonough, 927 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); and Saunders v. State, 863 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). On remand, the trial court, in its discretion, may reimpose the lien after compliance with rule 3.720(d)(1). A…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw