DAVID SCHEIDER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2024-10-08
No. 5D2023-3244
2024 FL 11888 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2024)

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.


Holding

A cost imposed under section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes, is mandatory.


Headnotes

[1] A cost imposed under Florida Statute section 938.27(8) is mandatory rather than discretionary.

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

Facts & Procedural History

David Scheider appealed from a circuit court decision regarding the imposition of certain costs in criminal cases.…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See O’Malley v. State, 378 So. 3d 672 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024); Parks v. State, 371 So. 3d 392, 393−94 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (holding that a cost imposed under section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes, is mandatory and recognizing conflict with D.L.J. v. State, 331 So. 3d 227 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)), reh’g denied, (Sept. 27, 2023), review granted, SC2023-1355, 2024 WL 370043 (Fla. Jan. 31, 2024).

MAKAR, EISNAUGLE, and SOUD, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw