DUANE MICHAEL COTTIER
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 cannot impose costs of prosecution and Public Defender fees exceeding the statutory amounts set forth in sections 938.27(8) and 938.29(1)(a), Florida Statutes, absent a request from the State Attorney's Office.
[1] A trial court lacks authority to impose costs of prosecution and Public Defender fees exceeding the statutory amounts prescribed in sections 938.27(8) and 938.29(1)(a), F…
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“trial court could not reimpose sheriff's investigative cost on remand because there was no record evidence that state requested the cost”
Citation to Mills v. State, 177 So. 3d 984, 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), establishing the principle that costs cannot be imposed without state request.
Duane Michael Cottier was convicted of one count of grand theft of $100,000 or more and twelve counts of misapplication of funds. The trial court impo…
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 Misapplication Of Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
DUANE MICHAEL COTTIER,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D18-3213
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed October 25, 2019
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Citrus County, Richard A. Howard, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Sean Kevin Gravel, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Andrea
K.
Totten, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Duane Michael Cottier appeals his judgment and sentence for one count of grand theft of $100,000 or more, a first-degree felony, and twelve counts of misapplication of funds. We affirm his judgment without further discussion, but we must reverse the cost portion of his sentence because neither the State Attorney's Office, nor his court-
2 appointed attorneys, requested more than the statutory amounts set forth in sections 938.27(8), 938.29(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2018).1 Accordingly, we reverse those portions of his sentence and remand with directions to the trial court to reduce the cost of prosecution and the Public Defender fee to the statutory amount of $100. See Mills v. State, 177 So. 3d 984, 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that trial court could not reimpose sheriff's investigative cost on remand because there was no record evidence that state requested the cost (citing DeSalvo v. State, 107 So. 3d 1185, 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013))).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with directions.
LAMBERT, J., and HIGBEE, H.L., Associate Judge, concur. JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge, concurs and concurs specially with opinion.
3 JACOBUS, B.W., concurring specially with opinion. 5D18-3213 I concur with the affirmance of the convictions in this case. However, in my opinion, a 45-year sentence for a non-violent monetary crime is extraordinarily harsh. The defendant scored a minimum sentence of 55.425 months of incarceration on his Criminal Punishment Code scoresheet. To sentence him to what is essentially a life sentence is a manifest injustice. I would hope that if the defendant files a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) motion for mitigation of his sentence, the trial judge would give it great consideration.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Mills v. State, 177 So. 3d 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
- Hensley S. Duncan v. State, 107 So. 3d 1185 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)