Pazo v. State, 96-0717
| Decision Date | 20 December 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-0717,96-0717 |
| Citation | 684 So.2d 898 |
| Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D180 Raymond PAZO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Fifth District |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Dee R. Ball, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Michael D. Crotty, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
The defendant appeals his sentence arguing that the trial court improperly directed him to pay investigative costs. We affirm the sentence but vacate that portion of the trial court's order requiring the defendant to pay the investigative costs because the trial court lacked the authority to impose such costs.
The defendant pled guilty to committing the offense of burglary of a structure. The trial court withheld adjudication and sentenced the defendant to serve a term of probation. As a special condition of probation, the trial court required that the defendant:
(1) "pay a total of $250 for costs of investigation"; and,
(2) "pay law enforcement investigative costs in the amount of $150.00 to be disbursed to New Smyrna Beach Police Department."
In so ruling, the trial court failed to cite any statutory authority for the imposition of these costs. This failure constitutes error. Samuels v. State, 649 So.2d 272 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), dismissed, 657 So.2d 1163 (Fla.1995) (). 1
Additionally, the instant record does not contain a request by the state that investigative costs be imposed, nor any documentation supporting the imposition of such costs. In the absence of such documentation, the trial court lacked the authority to impose investigative costs. Burdo v. State, 667 So.2d 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), quashed on other grounds, 682 So.2d 557 (Fla.1996). We note that a contemporaneous objection was not required because the trial court lacked the authority to impose these costs. See Golden v. State, 667 So.2d 933 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Gant v. State, 640 So.2d 1180 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
Accordingly, we affirm the defendant's sentence, vacate the imposition of investigative costs, and remand for the reimposition of such costs, if appropriate, upon compliance with the proper procedure.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; SENTENCE AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; CAUSE REMANDED.
1 We recognize that the imposition of investigation costs is authorized by several statutes including section 939.01(1),...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wines v. State, 96-834
...costs absent a request or supporting documentation for such costs from the state. § 939.01(1), Fla.Stat. (1995); Pazo v. State, 684 So.2d 898 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). The trial court further erred by failing to orally announce all discretionary costs and fees. Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla......
-
Bisson v. State, 96-3262
...of investigative costs under these circumstances is illegal. Walker v. State, 692 So.2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Pazo v. State, 684 So.2d 898 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Meyers v. State, 676 So.2d 57 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Golden v. State, 667 So.2d 933 (Fla. 2d DCA The state argues that section 924......
-
Williams v. State, 96-1657
...because the trial court lacked the authority to impose them. Bisson v. State, 696 So.2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Pazo v. State, 684 So.2d 898 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). Finally, Williams challenges, and the state concedes, a scrivener's error in the judgment. Williams was convicted of the third d......
-
Davis v. State, 95-1763
...request by the state that investigative costs be imposed, or any documentation supporting the imposition of such costs. Pazo v. State, 684 So.2d 898 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). We affirm the condition of probation which revokes Davis' driver's license for life because a license revocation being "a......