Samuels v. State, 93-3024
| Decision Date | 30 December 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-3024,93-3024 |
| Citation | 649 So.2d 272 |
| Parties | 20 Fla. L. Weekly D89 Dave SAMUELS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Susan A. Fagan, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Kellie A. Nielan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
In this direct criminal appeal, appellant raises two issues: whether it was error to deny his motion to suppress evidence because the state failed to establish that his consent to search was given voluntarily and whether the "FDLE" and "drug and alcohol" costs were properly imposed. We affirm the conviction, but agree that the trial court's imposition of these costs was flawed.
Assessed costs whose statutory authority is not specifically identified on the sentencing form 1 should have a reference by statute number to permit appellate review. Otherwise, this court is left to guess at the authority. See Thomas v. State, 633 So.2d 1122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); see also Bradshaw v. State, 638 So.2d 1024, 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We surmise that "FDLE" costs refers to costs authorized under section 939.01(1), Florida Statutes (1993), but this is not ascertainable on this record. Further, there appears to be no statutory authority for the imposition of drug and alcohol costs where a defendant is convicted of a felony. See Sec. 939.017, Fla.Stat. (1993). Accordingly, that portion of the sentence assessing FDLE and drug and alcohol costs against the defendant is stricken. The state may, if appropriate, seek reimposition.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED IN PART; COSTS VACATED; and REMANDED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. State, s. 94-2032
...number if the sentencing form does not specifically identify the statutory authority for imposing those costs. See Samuels v. State, 649 So.2d 272, 273 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). However, we clarify Samuels and hold that the specific statute number is unnecessary where, as here, the defendant has......
-
Pazo v. State, 96-0717
...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) (assessed costs whose statutory authority is not specifically identified on the sen......
-
Madison v. State, 95-424
...costs imposed in the written sentence or order of probation. See Brooks v. State, 649 So.2d 329 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Samuels v. State, 649 So.2d 272 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), cause dismissed, 657 So.2d 1163 Valdez v. State, 639 So.2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). In a case where the statutory basis ......
-
Robinson v. State
...authority for imposition of these costs was not set forth on the sentencing form, nor otherwise referenced. See Samuels v. State, 649 So.2d 272, 273 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), cause dismissed, 657 So.2d 1163 (Fla.1995). See also Fla. R.Crim. P. JUDGMENT and SENTENCE AFFIRMED; COSTS STRICKEN. COBB......