MARC NORMAN HUNT
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court errs in imposing $150 in prosecution costs when the State requests but presents no evidence to justify costs higher than the statutory $100 amount.
[1] A trial court may not impose prosecution costs exceeding the statutory amount without evidence demonstrating that higher costs were actually incurred.
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 intelligence“the State requested, and the trial court awarded, $150 in prosecution costs in each case, but nothing was presented to demonstrate higher costs were incurred”
Citation to Berrios v. State, 415 So. 3d 879 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025), establishing the standard for prosecution cost awards
Hunt admitted to violating probation in two cases. The trial court imposed $150 in prosecution costs in Case No. 2024-CF-1032, though the State presen…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 5D2024-3399 LT Case Nos. 09-2024-CF-83-A 09-2024-CF-1032-A _____________________________
MARC NORMAN HUNT,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee. _____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Citrus County. Joel D. Fritton, Judge.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Victoria Rose Cordero, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Roberts J. Bradford, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
October 24, 2025
PER CURIAM.
2 In this Anders* appeal, we affirm the judgments and sentences arising from Hunt’s admission to violating probation in Case Nos. 2024-CF-83 and 2024-CF-1032, respectively, but remand for the correction of error assessing costs in the latter. The trial court erred when it imposed the $150 for the cost of prosecution in Case No. 2024-CF-1032. While the State requested the cost, it presented no evidence to justify the higher cost. Thus, this cost should be reduced to $100. See Berrios v. State, 415 So. 3d 879, 879 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025) (affirming judgment and sentence of appellant, but remanding with instructions for trial court to reduce imposed prosecution costs where “the State requested, and the trial court awarded, $150 in prosecution costs in each case, but nothing was presented to demonstrate higher costs were incurred”).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with instructions to the trial court for entry of an amended judgment consistent with this opinion.
MAKAR, EDWARDS, and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
* Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).