MICHELLE SANTIAGO HASKINS
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.
Trial courts lack authority to impose costs and fines in criminal cases unless such imposition is specifically authorized by statute and the statutory authority is cited in the written disposition order.
[1] Trial courts lack authority to impose costs and fines in criminal cases unless the imposition is specifically authorized by statute and the statutory authority is cited i…
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 law is well settled that trial courts lack the authority to impose costs and fines in criminal cases unless such imposition is specifically authorized by statute and the statutory authority is cited in the defendant's written disposition order.”
Court's statement of the governing law requiring statutory authorization for costs and fines in criminal cases.
Michelle Santiago Haskins was convicted in Osceola County and sentenced to a criminal judgment that included $271 in court costs. The appeal was handl…
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 Statutory Authority For Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders1 appeal, we affirm Michelle Santiago Haskins’ judgment and sentence. We remand, however, for the trial court to identify the authority for the $271 in court costs it imposed during sentencing. See Cash v. State, 286 So. 3d 384, 385 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (“The law is well settled that trial courts lack the authority to impose costs and fines in criminal cases unless such imposition is specifically authorized by statute and the statutory authority is cited in the defendant’s written disposition order.” (quoting J.S. v. State, 920 So. 2d 752, 753 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006))).
AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
SASSO, TRAVER and NARDELLA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- J.S. v. State, 920 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Cash v. State, 286 So. 3d 384 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)