Long v. State, 87-2464

Decision Date29 March 1989
Docket NumberNo. 87-2464,87-2464
Parties14 Fla. L. Weekly 819 Lewis Burl LONG, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Julius J. Aulisio, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Brenda S. Taylor, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises two points in this appeal. The first point alleges that it was error for the trial judge to depart upward from the recommended guideline sentence without providing written reasons for doing so. However, the sentence imposed herein was pursuant to a plea agreement. This is sufficient reason for departing from the guidelines and, under these circumstances, written reasons for departure need not be given. Davis v. State, 528 So.2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Appellant's second point challenges the imposition of a fine and costs alleging no notice or opportunity to be heard in violation of Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). We hold that Jenkins does not apply to fines because fines are part of the potential sentence for particular crimes of which defendants are inherently on notice.

We do find that the $250.00 cost provision was imposed in violation of Jenkins and must be vacated. The state argues that Henriquez v. State, 513 So.2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) controls because costs were imposed in open court without objection by appellant. However, the judge did not give statutory authority for imposing costs. This has been held to deprive a defendant of adequate notice and opportunity to object. Gloster v. State, 528 So.2d 1288 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Therefore, we strike the imposition of costs but otherwise affirm.

FRANK, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PARKER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Williams
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • January 25, 1996
    ...591 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); but see Cecil v. State, 596 So.2d 461, 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Second DCA: See Long v. State, 540 So.2d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); but see State v. Esbenshade, 493 So.2d 487 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Fifth DCA: See Brooks v. State, 649 So.2d 329 (Fla. 5th DCA 199......
  • Casmay v. State, 89-3007
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • November 13, 1990
    ...a sentencing-guidelines departure where, as here, the sentence is imposed pursuant to a valid plea-bargain agreement. Long v. State, 540 So.2d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Davis v. State, 528 So.2d 521 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988). We entirely Moreover, we do not read Pop......
  • State v. Jones, 90-01305
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 24, 1991
    ...are required for a departure based upon a negotiated plea agreement, see Smith v. State, 529 So.2d 1106 (Fla.1988); Long v. State, 540 So.2d 903 (Fla.2d DCA 1989), the state was not a party to the plea agreement between the court and the defendant in this case. Upon remand, the trial court ......

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