Nix v. State
| Decision Date | 02 April 2012 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D11–8.,1D11–8. |
| Citation | 84 So.3d 424 |
| Parties | Alexander L. NIX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Alexander L. NIX, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 1D11–8.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
April 2, 2012.
Jeffrey E. Lewis, Regional Conflict Counsel, Sheila Callahan, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, of the Office of Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Giselle D. Lylen, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
WETHERELL, J.
Appellant raises three issues in this direct appeal of his conviction and sentence: 1) that section 893.13, Florida Statutes, is facially unconstitutional; 2) that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal; and 3) that the trial court erred in imposing a discretionary fine and surcharge that had not been orally pronounced. We affirm the first issue based on Flagg v. State, 74 So.3d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), affirm the second issue without further comment, and reverse the third issue for the reasons that follow.
The jury found Appellant guilty of sale of cocaine and resisting an officer without violence. The trial court adjudicated Appellant guilty and sentenced him to 15 years on the cocaine offense and time served on the resisting offense. At sentencing, the court orally pronounced "costs and fines" of $1,522.50, along with $100 for cost of prosecution, $100 for "defense litigation fee,"1 and $50 for the public defender application fee.
Appellant did not object to the imposition of these costs and fines at sentencing. He did, however, file a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) in which he argued that the $1,050 fine and $52.50 surcharge reflected in the written judgment and sentence should be stricken because they were not specifically pronounced at sentencing. The trial court denied the motion, finding that this claim was waived.
The record does not support the trial court's finding of waiver. Nor is there any merit to the State's argument that this issue was not properly preserved for appellate review. Appellant preserved the issue through his rule 3.800(b)(2) motion. See Jackson v. State, 983 So.2d 562, 574 (Fla.2008) ; Carter v. State, 791 So.2d 525, 526–27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Statutorily-mandated costs may be imposed without notice and, thus, need not be specifically pronounced at the sentencing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mills v. State
...because such costs may not be imposed without affording the defendant notice and an opportunity to be heard." Nix v. State, 84 So.3d 424, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (citation omitted).I.The $150 public defender's lien secures two separate statutory impositions. First, under section 27.52(1)(b)......
-
Sharpe v. State
...and court cost, it should enter a corrected Judgment for Fines, Costs, Fees, and Surcharges striking these amounts. See Nix v. State, 84 So.3d 424, 426 n. 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). We further find the trial court erred by imposing the legal assistance lien of $100 without first advising Appell......
-
Mojica v. State
...surcharge from Mr. Mojica's judgment must be stricken. See Cruz v. State, 830 So.2d 892, 892–93 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) ; Nix v. State, 84 So.3d 424, 425–26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).Finally, with respect to the imposition of the indigent legal assistant assessment, the State argues that the $200 asse......
-
Ogden v. State, 1D12–2604.
...cost need not be orally pronounced, it is error to impose a discretionary cost without orally pronouncing it. Nix v. State, 84 So.3d 424, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). The cost imposed under section 939.185(1)(a) and the local ordinance implementing it may stand, as it is not discretionary. Howe......
-
Appeals
...costs were improperly imposed without announcing them in court is properly preserved by filing a 3.800(b) motion. Nix v. State, 84 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) An erroneous or missing jury instruction is fundamental error only when the failure relates to an essential element of the crime.......
-
Judgment and sentence
...it at sentencing. The court errs in imposing a lump sum of costs, which includes both discretionary and mandatory costs. Nix v. State, 84 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) The court errs in imposing a $150 PD fee under §938.29 without providing an opportunity to be heard. When imposing assessm......