Like v. State, 63A01-0105-CR-179.
| Decision Date | 16 April 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 63A01-0105-CR-179.,63A01-0105-CR-179. |
| Citation | 766 N.E.2d 416 |
| Parties | Tina R. LIKE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Michael C. Keating, Keating, Bumb, Vowels, LaPlante & Kent, P.C., Evansville, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Steve Carter, Attorney General of Indiana, Monika Prekopa Talbot, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
We consider the State's petition for rehearing in which it argues that we erred in concluding that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing a $125.00 criminal costs fee under Indiana Code Section 33-19-5-1(a). See Like v. State, 760 N.E.2d 1188, 1193 (Ind.Ct.App.2002)
. Indiana Code Section 33-19-5-1(a) provides that "[f]or each action that results in a felony conviction under IC 35-50-2 .... the clerk shall collect from the defendant a criminal costs fee of one hundred twenty dollars ($120)." (Emphasis added.) In our opinion, we noted that Like was convicted of a Class B felony under Indiana Code Section 35-48-4-2(a), not under Indiana Code 35-50-2, and vacated the portion of the trial court's order imposing a $125.00 criminal costs fee. See Like, 760 N.E.2d at 1193.
The State acknowledges that a defendant cannot be convicted of a felony under Indiana Code 35-50-2, which governs felony sentencing provisions, but contends that the "spirit of the statute" requires a trial court to impose the fee when a defendant has been convicted of a felony. We agree with the State's contention but nevertheless conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing a fee in excess of the statutory limit of $120.00. We therefore grant the State's petition for rehearing and remand with instructions to impose a criminal costs fee in the amount of $120.00.
Petition for rehearing granted and remanded with instructions.
RILEY, J., would deny rehearing.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McRoy v. State
...of a manifest abuse of discretion. Like v. State, 760 N.E.2d 1188, 1191 (Ind.Ct.App.2002), modified on reh'g on other grounds, 766 N.E.2d 416 (Ind.Ct.App.2002). An abuse of discretion occurs if the court's decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances befor......
-
Jones v. State, 32A04-1004-CR-309.
...on an indigent defendant because the fee was mandatory per the relevant statute), reh'g granted and remanded on other grounds, 766 N.E.2d 416 (Ind.Ct.App.2002). a. Jury Fee Ind.Code § 33-37-5-19 authorizes the trial court to assess jury costs against the defendant, but limits the amount: "[......
-
Mathis v. State
...court's imposition of fees for an abuse of discretion. Like v. State, 760 N.E.2d 1188, 1193 (Ind. Ct.App.), modified on reh'g, 766 N.E.2d 416 (Ind.Ct.App.2002). Indiana Code section 33-19-5-1 lists the various fees that may be collected from a defendant in a criminal action resulting in a f......
-
Banks v. State
...no abuse of discretion where the court imposed a $300 fee on an indigent defendant), reh'g granted and remanded on other grounds 766 N.E.2d 416 (Ind.Ct.App.2002). The trial court did not specify which statute authorized the costs and fees it imposed, but there are two possibilities. Ind.Cod......