Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Bailey v. State

Bailey v. State

693 So. 2d 142, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5395, 1997 WL 255311
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 16, 1997
DocketNo. 96-3158
StatusPublished

This text of 693 So. 2d 142 (Bailey 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
Bailey v. State, 693 So. 2d 142, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5395, 1997 WL 255311 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence but strike the imposition of a public defender’s fee because notice was not given to the defendant of his right to challenge the amount of the fee as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1). See L.A.N. v. State, 675 So.2d 711 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Fontenont v. State, 631 So.2d 379 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). However, on remand, the fee may be reimposed after compliance with the rule.

[143]*143JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; PUBLIC DEFENDER’S FEE STRICKEN; CAUSE REMANDED.

PETERSON, C.J., and W. SHARP and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Fontenont v. State
631 So. 2d 379 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
L.A.N. v. State
675 So. 2d 711 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
693 So. 2d 142, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5395, 1997 WL 255311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.