Gatlin v. State

Decision Date12 May 1993
Docket NumberNo. 92-00555,92-00555
Citation618 So.2d 765
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals
Parties18 Fla. L. Weekly D1255 Kenneth Leonard GATLIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Karen K. Purdy, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Elaine L. Thompson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Hollywood, for appellee.

CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant challenges his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and the order requiring him to pay certain costs of prosecution. We find error only in the imposition of costs of prosecution.

First, there is no written order requiring appellant to pay the costs of prosecution. Although the bench notes and the transcript reflect that those costs were ordered, the record on appeal contains no final written order concerning costs. Accordingly, this court has no jurisdiction. Rivera v. Dade County, 485 So.2d 17 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).

We cannot remedy this situation, however, by merely relinquishing jurisdiction for entry of a proper written order because the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the oral order imposing costs in the first place. Although the court had reserved jurisdiction at sentencing to consider imposing costs for the prosecutor's salary and the police investigation, when the court actually ordered those costs, it was without jurisdiction to do so because appellant had already filed his timely notice of appeal, wresting jurisdiction from the trial court and vesting it here. Gonzalez v. State, 384 So.2d 57 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).

We, therefore, dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction with instructions that the court may reimpose those investigative costs that may be properly imposed so long as the court had reserved jurisdiction to impose them at the original sentencing hearing. In that regard, we observe that, contrary to appellant's challenge, the state's affidavit setting forth the costs of prosecution falls under the exception to the hearsay rule contained in section 90.803(8), Florida Statutes (1991), and was properly admitted as a statement reduced to writing setting forth the activities of the office. Further, under Smith v. State, 606 So.2d 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), rev. denied, 618 So.2d 211 (Fla.1993), the state is not entitled to recover attorney's fees as part of the costs of prosecution.

Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

SCHOONOVER and THREADGILL,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 30, 2017
    ...under section 90.803(8), as they "d[id] not simply set forth the activities of a government agency"), with Gatlin v. State, 618 So.2d 765, 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (finding that state's affidavit detailing costs of prosecution fell within first category of the public records exception). The R......
  • Connor v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • December 8, 2006
    ...to review oral order that was made from the bench where order was never reduced to writing and thus not "rendered"); Gatlin v. State, 618 So.2d 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); McClinton v. State, 588 So.2d 701 (Fla. 5th DCA Since there is no rule or statute that places jurisdictional time limits on......
  • Marinelli v. State, s. 95-02599
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 25, 1998
    ...lacks jurisdiction to review orders which have not been reduced to writing. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(b), 9.020(g); Gatlin v. State, 618 So.2d 765, 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Phillips v. Albertson's Inc., 472 So.2d 513, 514 (Fla. 2d DCA This, however, does not dispose of the issue. Because Mari......
  • Wyatt v. State, 94-0101
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 22, 1995
    ...notice of appeal divested the trial court of jurisdiction and vested exclusive jurisdiction here, and his reliance upon Gatlin v. State, 618 So.2d 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). 1 Nevertheless, we conclude appellant's position is not persuasive in light of Roberts v. Askew, 260 So.2d 492 (Fla.1972......
  • 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