Wood v. City of Jacksonville, O--308
| Decision Date | 20 May 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. O--308,O--308 |
| Citation | 248 So.2d 176 |
| Parties | Albert WOOD, Petitioner, v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, a Municipal Corporation, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Joseph M. Glickstein, Jr., Jacksonville, for petitioner.
James C. Rinaman, Jr., David U. Tumin, and J. Edward Wall, Jacksonville, for respondent.
Petitioner seeks review by common law certiorari of an order taxing costs rendered by the Circuit Court of Duval County acting in its appellate capacity. The contention is made that the challenged order constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law for which no remedy by appeal is afforded under the constitution and laws of this state.
Petitioner was arrested and charged with an offense against the ordinances of the City of Jacksonville. Based upon his plea of not guilty, he was tried, convicted and sentenced by the municipal court. He appealed his judgment of conviction to the Circuit Court of Duval County which, upon consideration of the points urged, found that the conviction of petitioner was void because it resulted in the face of insufficient evidence of an essential element of the offense charged. The judgment of conviction and sentence was reversed with instructions that the complaint against petitioner be dismissed and he be discharged.
Petitioner then filed before the Circuit Court his motion for an order taxing costs in his favor for the following items and in the following amounts, to wit:
"1. Bail bond premium $ 15.00
2. Appellate filing fees 10.50
3. Bond on appeal 15.00
4. Transcript of testimony
court reporter 99.90
--------
Total $140.40"
Upon consideration of such motion the Circuit Court rendered its order taxing costs in favor of petitioner for the appellate filing fee paid by him in the amount of $10.50, but denied the motion as to the remaining items.
Respondent challenges the jurisdiction of this court to review by common law certiorari the cost judgment about which complaint is made. It is its contention that this type of writ may issue only in those instances in which the jurisdiction of the lower court has been challenged, or where that court has departed from the essential requirements of law in ruling upon a procedural as distinguished from a substantive question of law. With this contention we are unable to agree. It has long been the established law of Florida that a writ of common law certiorari issues in the sound discretion of a superior court directed to an inferior court to determine from the face of the record whether the lower court has exceeded its jurisdiction or otherwise deviated from the essential requirements of law. This procedure is available to District Courts of Appeal in their review of judgments rendered by the circuit courts acting in their appellate capacity when reviewing judgments of the municipal courts of this state. 1 The questions reviewable by certiorari may include those involving matters of substantive as well as procedural law. Having determined that we possess the requisite jurisdiction to issue the writ prayed for, we will proceed to a consideration of the merits.
Costs as such in criminal cases were unknown to the common law. As a consequence, recovery and allowance of such costs rest entirely on statutory provisions and no right to or liability for costs exists in the absence of statutory authorization. 2 The foregoing principle has been adopted as the prevailing rule in this state. 3
The general policy of Florida prohibits the imposition upon a defendant acquitted of a criminal charge of any costs or fees incurred in connection with his prosecution. 4
We will first consider the item of cost claimed by petitioner but disallowed by the Circuit Court for the amount paid by him to the court reporter for transcribing the testimony adduced at the trial. The rules adopted by the Supreme Court relating to appeals in criminal cases provide that appeals to circuit courts from municipal courts shall be prosecuted in accordance with Part VI thereof. 5 The rules require that the cost of the stenographic report of the trial proceedings shall be paid by the defendant if he takes the appeal. 6 This rule further provides that if an appealing defendant is adjudged insolvent, the county shall pay the cost of the transcript thereby making it a taxable item of cost in the case.
Our statute relating to appeals in criminal cases from municipal courts to circuit courts provides that when any proceeding in the municipal court has been stenographically reported, the court reporter shall file his duly authenticated...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. State, 92-00242
...Lindsey v. Dykes, 129 Fla. 65, 175 So. 792 (1937); Masters v. State, 358 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Wood v. City of Jacksonville, 248 So.2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); City of Miami v. Gilbert, 102 So.2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958). The circuit court rejected Williams's argument that the count......
-
Warren v. Capuano
...the statutory provisions and no right to or liability for costs exists in the absence of statutory authorization. Wood v. City of Jacksonville, 248 So.2d 176 (Fla.App.1971); 20 Am.Jur.2d Cost § 108 at 82; 20 C.J.S. Costs § 441 at The appellee relies on Section 939.06, Florida Statutes, F.S.......
-
Warren v. Capuano
...here. However, reference for comparison purposes is made to Lillibridge v. City of Miami, Fla., 276 So.2d 40, and Wood v. City of Jacksonville, Fla.App.1st, 248 So.2d 176. As will appear from its opinion, the District Court in affirming the judgment of the trial court discussed and interpre......
-
Bradshaw v. State, s. 93-397
...that costs cannot be assessed in a criminal case unless there is statutory authority for their imposition. Wood v. City of Jacksonville, 248 So.2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). This is [c]osts as such in criminal cases were unknown to the common law. As a consequence, recovery and allowance of s......