Brown v. State
| Decision Date | 27 December 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-2577,90-2577 |
| Citation | 591 So.2d 1069 |
| Parties | Curtis BROWN Sr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 591 So.2d 1069, 17 Fla. L. Week. D108 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, Robert Friedman, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach (withdrawn after filing brief), and Sharon Bradley of Dailey & Associates, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Jacqueline Barakat, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
The appellant pled no contest to charges of sale and possession of cocaine, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The appellant was then tried on another count of possession of cocaine and one count of trafficking in cocaine. After the jury returned a verdict of guilty, the appellant was sentenced to fifteen years prison time on one count of sale of cocaine, a concurrent term of seventeen years for the trafficking in cocaine, with a three-year minimum mandatory sentence, a concurrent term of five years on two other counts for possession of cocaine, and a consecutive sentence of fifteen years probation for the firearm charge. A misdemeanor marijuana possession charge was nolle prossed by the state.
As a special condition of his probation the appellant was ordered to pay $225 in court costs, a $50,000 fine, $190 in public defender's fees, $500 to the Drug Abuse Trust Fund, $2,835 in investigative fees to the Indian River Sheriff's Department and $2050 to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. At sentencing the trial court applied legal constraint points seven times, based on the seven counts for which the appellant was adjudged guilty. We reverse the multiple application of the legal constraint points, noting that our previous holding to the contrary in Carter v. State, 571 So.2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), has been quashed by the supreme court in Carter v. State, 586 So.2d 340 (Fla.1991).
We first submitted this case for en banc consideration, but due to the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Florida in Flowers v. State, 586 So.2d 1058 (Fla.1991), this court voted to dis-en banc, and the case reverted to the original panel. The supreme court clearly held in Flowers that legal constraint points should be applied only once. The matter is therefore settled and we are compelled to reverse the sentence of the appellant in the case at bar. The trial court shall, on remand, re-calculate the assessment of legal constraint points and sentence the appellant appropriately in accord with this opinion and with Flowers.
We find that the trial court erred with regard to the imposition of a public defender's fee. The appellant must be given notice and the opportunity to be heard prior to the imposition of this type of fee. In the Interest of R.B., 582 So.2d 163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. State, 91-1898
...department for the investigation, pursuant to Section 939.01, Florida Statutes (1989), rather than as restitution. See Brown v. State, 591 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA1991) (characterization of investigative costs as "restitution" on sentencing form was scrivener's Moreover, contrary to the sta......
-
Johnson v. State, 92-941
...must make a finding of the defendant's ability to pay the $100 laboratory fee authorized by section 893.13(4)(b). In Brown v. State, 591 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), the court reversed an assessment under section 893.13(4)(b), because the trial court failed to determine that the defendan......
-
Sparkes v. State, 96-0443
...order properly assessing that payment as a cost of investigation. Staudt v. State, 616 So.2d 600 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Brown v. State, 591 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART and GUNTHER, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur. ...
-
Mabrey v. State, 91-1470
...586 So.2d 1058 (Fla.1991). Legal constraint points are only to be applied once, rather than in multiples. See also Brown v. State, 591 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). The appellant's sentence is reversed and we remand the case for resentencing in accordance with DOWNEY, STONE and POLEN, JJ.......