Huesca v. State, 2D01-5285.
| Decision Date | 28 March 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D01-5285.,2D01-5285. |
| Citation | 841 So.2d 585 |
| Parties | Shawn Michael HUESCA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Richard P. Albertine, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Katherine Coombs Cline, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Shawn Michael Huesca, charged with one count of unlawful manufacture of marijuana, challenges his judgment and sentence. After the trial court denied his dispositive motion to suppress, Huesca pleaded no contest while reserving the right to appeal the denial. While we affirm Huesca's conviction, we find merit in his arguments concerning the sentence rendered.
On appeal, Huesca raises three issues. First, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Huesca contends that the police officers unlawfully entered his home without a warrant. The trial court found that exigent circumstances permitted the search; we agree and affirm the trial court's order denying the motion to suppress.
Huesca next submits that the trial court improperly directed the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to revoke his license pursuant to section 322.055(1), Florida Statutes (2001). Section 322.055(1) provides, in part, that:
[U]pon the conviction of a person 18 years of age or older for possession or sale of, trafficking in, or conspiracy to possess, sell, or traffic in a controlled substance, the court shall direct the department to revoke the driver's license or driving privilege of the person. The period of such revocation shall be 2 years....
The unlawful manufacture of marijuana is not one of the enumerated offenses contained in the statute.1 Therefore, the trial court erred when it ordered the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to revoke Huesca's license. See Lee v. State, 673 So.2d 990 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
.
Finally, Huesca argues that the trial court improperly imposed discretionary costs pursuant to section 939.18(1)(b), Florida Statues (2001). This court previously has held that "the [trial] court is obligated to consider the defendant's financial resources and other factors in making the decision to assess ... costs." Edwards v. State, 814 So.2d 1197, 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (citing Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111, 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)). The trial court also is required to orally announce the imposition of discretionary costs. Id.
Here, the record reveals that the trial court failed to orally announce the imposition of costs. Additionally, the record fails to reflect that the trial court considered Huesca's financial resources in its decision to assess costs. Therefore, we strike that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gonzalez v. State, 3D02-2708.
...announce the imposition of costs, nor did it consider defendant's financial resources in its decision to assess costs. Huesca v. State, 841 So.2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Convictions affirmed; sentence reversed; and cause remanded for further consistent ...
-
Pugh v. State
...Statutes (2005). Solicitation to deliver cocaine is not one of the enumerated offenses contained in the statute. See Huesca v. State, 841 So.2d 585, 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Affirmed in part, reversed in part to correct the sentencing WARNER and FARMER, JJ., concur. ...
-
Cook v. State, 2D03-5305.
...resources and other factors in making the decision to assess ... costs.'" This language from Edwards was repeated in Huesca v. State, 841 So.2d 585, 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). In both cases, the discretionary costs at issue were imposed pursuant to section 939.18(1), Florida Statutes (2001), w......
-
McLean v. State, 2D02-5499.
...cost, a court is to consider the financial resources of the defendant as well as other relevant factors. Huesca v. State, 841 So.2d 585, 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Edwards v. State, 814 So.2d 1197, 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Trial courts also are obligated "to orally announce the imposition of d......