YANCO PETERSON, 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.
Peterson appealed his conviction and sentence for violation of probation and animal baiting crimes. The appellate court affirmed the convictions but partially reversed and remanded due to a discretionary fine and surcharge imposed without proper announcement at sentencing.
The court affirmed Peterson's convictions and sentences, but reversed and remanded on the issue of the discretionary fine and surcharge imposed without proper announcement at sentencing. The trial court must follow appropriate procedures on remand before reimposing these costs.
[1] Collateral estoppel prevents parties from relitigating issues that have already been fully litigated and determined.
[2] A discretionary fine and related surcharge imposed under Florida Statutes sections 775.083 and 938.04, respectively, must be specifically announced by the trial court at…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Appellant is collaterally estopped from arguing the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress. He challenged the denial in a prior case raising the same arguments as raised here, and this Court affirmed the order per curiam.”
Establishes that Peterson cannot relitigate the suppression issue because it was already decided in a prior appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePeterson was convicted in two cases: case number 08-781 CF for violation of probation, and case number 10-356 CF for six counts of fighting or baiting…
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 Discretionary Fines cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm conviction and-sentence imposed in lower court case number -08-781 CF (1D12-3788) for violation of probation, and the convictions and sentences imposed in lower court case number 10-356CF (1D12-3791) for six counts of fighting or baiting animals. Appellant is collaterally estopped from arguing the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress. He challenged the denial in a prior case raising the same arguments as raised here, and this Court affirmed the order per curiam. See Peterson v. State, 118 So.3d 224 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); see also Ziegler v. State, 116 So.3d 255, 258 (Fla.2013) (“In Florida, collateral estoppel prevents the same parties from relitigating issues that have already been fully litigated and determined.”). In addition, the Order Granting Motion to Cite Statute and Strike Fine and Surcharges entered July 30, 2013, in lower court case number 08-781 CF remedies the errors in the amended final judgment that Appellant now seeks to be corrected. Further, the sentence in the amended final judgment in lower court case number 10-356CF for Count 19 accurately reflects the sentence the trial judge orally pronounced.
However, the amended final judgment in lower court case number 10-356CF imposes a discretionary fine and related surcharge under sections 775.083 and 938.04, Florida Statutes, respectively, which the trial court failed to specifically announce at sentencing. Accordingly, we strike these costs and remand for the trial court to enter a corrected judgment. On remand, the court may reimpose the discretionary fine and surcharge after following the appropriate procedures. See DeSalvo v. State, 107 So.3d 1185, 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Nix v. State, 84 So.3d 424, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
AFFIRMED, in part; REVERSED, in part, and REMANDED.
VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cortez Ford v. State, 167 So. 3d 518 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
Authorities Cited
- NIX v. State, 84 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- DeSALVO v. State, 107 So. 3d 1185 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Zeigler v. State, 116 So. 3d 255 (Fla. 2013)