Belton v. State, 95-00406

Decision Date22 March 1996
Docket NumberNo. 95-00406,95-00406
Citation673 So.2d 880
Parties21 Fla. L. Weekly D785 Arthur BELTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Cynthia A. Holloway, Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and John T. Kilcrease, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robert J. Krauss, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PATTERSON, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant challenges his judgment and sentences for delivery of cocaine and possession of cocaine. His appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree with counsel that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal as to the appellant's convictions and, therefore, affirm. However, we reverse the appellant's habitual offender sentence for possession of cocaine and remand for resentencing.

The trial court sentenced the appellant as a habitual offender to thirty years for delivery of cocaine and ten years for possession of cocaine. His sentences were suspended and he was placed on two years' community control and two years' probation. Although the appellant's sentence was properly enhanced for delivery of cocaine under the habitual offender statute, the appellant can not receive a habitual offender sentence for possession of cocaine. See § 775.084(1)(a)3., Fla.Stat. (1993); Perez v. State, 647 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (section 775.084(1)(a)3. does not permit habitualization of defendant when offense is possession of a controlled substance).

In addition, the trial court erred in imposing a public defender's lien of $500 without providing the appellant notice or an opportunity to object. The appellant may contest the attorney's fees under Bourque v. State, 595 So.2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (appellant can have fees stricken by filing an objection in the trial court within thirty days of mandate; fees may be reimposed after notice and hearing).

Finally, the court imposed $255 in court costs and $100 for a "drug fund" without stating the statutory authority for the imposition of these costs. Sutton v. State, 635 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (written order must contain appropriate citation to statute authorizing cost). Thus, we strike those costs without prejudice to the state to seek...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Denson v. State, 97-00611
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 13, 1998
    ...offender sentence for the third-degree felony of possession of cocaine. See § 775.084(1)(a)(3), Fla. Stat. (1995); Belton v. State, 673 So.2d 880 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). 5 Second, the five-year increase in the term of imprisonment in the written sentence clearly violates the rule that the writt......
  • Kirby v. State, 95-03568
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 20, 1997
    ...are mandatory or discretionary, must be cited in the written order. Smith v. State, 686 So.2d 8 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Belton v. State, 673 So.2d 880 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Reyes, 655 So.2d at 119. The remaining $2 was a discretionary cost imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes ......
  • Ishmael v. State, 98-04339.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 21, 1999
    ...habitual felony offender sentences for these offenses set aside and to be resentenced pursuant to the guidelines. See Belton v. State, 673 So.2d 880 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). We reverse on Ishmael's claim that his sentence for count one, possession of cocaine, is illegal because he has made a fac......
  • Vernon v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 26, 1996
    ...(1993), a defendant cannot receive a habitual offender sentence for possession of a controlled substance. See also Belton v. State, 673 So.2d 880 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). We, therefore, remand this case to the trial court for resentencing on the possession of cocaine offense. We otherwise affirm......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT