Farmer v. State, 92-01402
| Decision Date | 30 April 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 92-01402,92-01402 |
| Citation | 617 So.2d 447 |
| Parties | 18 Fla. L. Week. D1130 Bernard FARMER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender and A. Anne Owens, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Bernard Farmer attacks the trial court's final judgment adjudicating him guilty of attempted second degree murder with a firearm and imposing costs of prosecution and attorney's fees. He raises three issues. We find no merit to either the first issue concerning the admission of the victim's photograph or the second issue concerning the imposition of costs pursuant to section 939.01, Florida Statutes (1991). We do, however, agree with appellant that the trial court erred in imposing attorney's fees without affording appellant notice and an opportunity to be heard.
The trial court imposed attorney's fees pursuant to section 27.56, Florida Statutes (1991). Appellant's counsel, a public defender, advised the court in the appellant's presence at the sentencing hearing that he intended to file a motion for attorney's fees for 41.5 hours at $50.00 per hour. The judge then discussed generally with the defendant that a civil judgment might be imposed against him for such costs. The final judgment specified only that attorney's fees would be assessed at a rate of $50.00 per hour. Appellant specifically elected not to waive notice of and the right to appear at a hearing to assess a reasonable fee for appointed counsel. The public defender's motion for attorney's fees filed three weeks later was not served on defendant. Appellant's first notice of the imposition of attorney's fees was his receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Prior notice is indispensable to the imposition of attorney's fees under section 27.56(1)(a). In the Interest of R.B., 582 So.2d 163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Because appellant did not receive adequate prior notice of the imposition of attorney's fees, we reverse the assessment of attorney's fees. The trial court may conduct further proceedings with prior notice to appellant and an opportunity for a hearing on the assessment of attorney's fees. We otherwise affirm the judgment and conviction.
Reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reyes v. State
...as a cost. These costs are case-specific and require compliance with the notice procedures for discretionary costs. Farmer v. State, 617 So.2d 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). . Sec. 893.13(4), .16, .165, Fla.Stat. As discussed in section VI of this opinion, the trial court is authorized to impose c......
-
Davis v. Green
... ... Freda Johnson GREEN, Jameica Norwood, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Wal-Mart Associates, Inc., and State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., Defendant-Appellants ... No. 44,033-CA ... Court of Appeal of ... ...
-
Callaway v. State, 94-00259
...court failed to give the appellant notice and an opportunity to be heard regarding the imposition of those fees. See Farmer v. State, 617 So.2d 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Lastly, we strike the imposition of $100 to the FDLE for laboratory services since the trial court failed to determine the ......
-
Trice v. State, 94-00355
...assessment. See Wilson v. State, 651 So.2d 1302 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Farmer v. State, 617 So.2d 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Bourque v. State, 595 So.2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). On remand, Mr. Trice shall have thirty days from the date of the manda......