Armstrong v. State

923 So. 2d 1252, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4239, 2006 WL 740934
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 24, 2006
DocketNo. 2D04-1965
StatusPublished

This text of 923 So. 2d 1252 (Armstrong v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Armstrong v. State, 923 So. 2d 1252, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4239, 2006 WL 740934 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm Virginia Armstrong’s conviction for trafficking in hydrocodone. See §§ 893.03(c); .135(l)(c)(l), (6), Fla. Stat. (2002). We strike the $150 cost imposed for “CFF” because the circuit court did not cite any statutory authority for this cost. See Cruz v. State, 830 So.2d 892 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2002). Armstrong preserved this issue by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). The circuit court did not rule on her motion within sixty days, so it is deemed denied. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B).

Conviction affirmed, cost stricken.

NORTHCUTT, SALCINES, and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cruz v. State
830 So. 2d 892 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
923 So. 2d 1252, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4239, 2006 WL 740934, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armstrong-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.