Brown v. State, 85-1948

Decision Date01 April 1987
Docket NumberNo. 85-1948,85-1948
Parties12 Fla. L. Weekly 930 Alphonso BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Steve Krosschell, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Theda R. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the judgment and sentence resulting from his adjudication of guilty of living off the earnings of a prostitute in violation of section 796.05, Florida Statutes (1983). Appellant raises a number of points on appeal, only three of which we discuss.

We have considered each of the issues presented by the appellant including his attack on the constitutionality of section 796.05, Florida Statutes (1983). His constitutional challenge is without merit. See Eaton v. State, 481 So.2d 1254 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). We affirm his conviction.

We do find merit, however, in appellant's argument that the court erred in sentencing him. The sentencing guidelines recommended any nonstate prison sanction. The court instead sentenced appellant to two years' community control. The supreme court has recently held that where the guidelines recommendation is "any nonstate prison sanction," a sentence of community control constitutes a departure from the sentencing guidelines. State v. Mestas, 507 So.2d 587 (Fla. 1987). Since there were no written reasons for departure, we reverse and remand for either correction of the sentence or entry of written reasons supporting the departure. State v. Jackson, 478 So.2d 1054 (Fla.1985); State v. Bruner, 503 So.2d 457 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

Appellant also correctly asserts that the court erred in imposing $1,000 costs without prior notice. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). We, therefore, strike the costs without prejudice to the state seeking imposition of costs after appropriate notice and hearing. Dilla v. State, 503 So.2d 1316 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). In addition, the record reveals that the court failed to cite proper statutory authority for assessing the $1,000 costs. On remand if the court assesses costs, the court must cite proper statutory authority. See Allen v. State, 508 So.2d 360 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

We affirm the conviction and reverse the sentence. The assessment of costs is stricken. This matter is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Broward County v. Michaelson, 95-0742
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 17, 1996
    ...charges, costs and fees against a defendant and specifically refers to the statutes authorizing those charges. See also: Brown v. State, 506 So.2d 1068 [2 DCA 1987]; Sutton v. State, 635 So.2d 1032 [2 DCA 9. This court finds that neither the Chief Judge nor the Broward County Commission has......
  • Hamm v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 9, 1988
    ...by this court's holding in Henriquez v. State, 513 So.2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). We, accordingly, strike these costs. See Brown v. State, 506 So.2d 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA), petition for review denied, 515 So.2d 229 (Fla.1987). Should the trial court decide to again impose costs, it must cite pr......
  • Sanders v. State, 87-1468
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 1, 1989
    ...Alexander v. State, 513 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). See also Grace v. State, 506 So.2d 1147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Brown v. State, 506 So.2d 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 515 So.2d 229 (1987) (reversible error to impose without written reasons community control which was a departure sen......
  • Moore v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 3, 1988
    ...assessment be stricken without prejudice to the reimposition of costs after proper statutory notice to the defendant. See Brown v. State, 506 So.2d 1068 (Fla. 2d DCA), petition for review denied, 515 So.2d 229 Third, the defendant complains that the trial court erred in failing to file a se......
  • 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