MICHAEL HENRY CHESTER
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.
Investigative costs imposed in the final judgment that were not part of the written plea agreement and were not requested by the prosecutor at the change of plea hearing must be removed, and the State's opportunity to request such costs is forfeited once the judgment is entered.
[1] Investigative costs under section 938.27, Florida Statutes, cannot be imposed in a final judgment unless they were part of the plea agreement or were requested by the pro…
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“Furthermore, because the State failed to request these costs before the trial court entered the judgment against Appellant, the State's opportunity to request these costs has passed, and the trial court may not reimpose these costs on remand.”
Court's explanation for why investigative costs cannot be reimposed on remand
Michael Henry Chester entered into a plea agreement with the State of Florida. The trial court entered a final judgment imposing $100 in investigative…
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 Investigative Costs 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
MICHAEL HENRY CHESTER,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-2870
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed January 31, 2020
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, Raul A. Zambrano, Judge.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Mark
A. Williams, Assistant Public Defender,
Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm, without further discussion, the judgment and sentences imposed upon Appellant consistently with the plea agreement between the parties, with one exception.
2
The written final judgment for costs directed Appellant to pay $100 investigative costs under section 938.27, Florida Statutes (2018), to the Daytona Beach Police Department. These costs were not part of the written plea agreement between Appellant and the State. They were not requested by the prosecutor on behalf of the police department, nor, for that matter, were they even mentioned at the change of plea hearing. The investigative costs were simply summarily included in the written judgment. Accordingly, we remand with directions that the court enter an amended judgment that does not include the $100 investigative costs. See Chambers v. State, 217 So. 3d 210, 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Furthermore, because the State failed to request these costs before the trial court entered the judgment against Appellant, the State’s opportunity to request these costs has passed, and the trial court may not reimpose these costs on remand. See Richards v. State, No. SC19-24, 2020 WL 238611, at *2 (Fla. Jan. 16, 2020) (citing § 938.27(1), Fla. Stat. (2019)).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.
ORFINGER, LAMBERT, and HARRIS, JJ., concur.