Bell v. State

564 So. 2d 289, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5444, 1990 WL 105507
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bell v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 573 So. 2d 10
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 27, 1990·No. No. 88-00192·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant raises two issues on appeal. We find merit in only one. We order the attorney’s fees and costs provision stricken since they were imposed without prior notice and an opportunity to be heard. Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). As we have recently stated, we see no need to certify the issue because of recent federal decisions interpreting a similar federal statute. Lundy v. State, 559 So.2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).

We, therefore, affirm the appellant’s convictions and sentences but vacate the order imposing costs. On remand, the trial court may reimpose costs if the proper notice and opportunity to be heard are given the appellant. The appellant has thirty days thereafter to file any appeal of the imposition of costs.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

Bell v. State, 564 So. 2d 289, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5444, 1990 WL 105507 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

564 So. 2d 289 (Bell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jenkins v. State
444 So. 2d 947 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1984)
Mays v. State
519 So. 2d 618 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1988)
Lundy v. State
559 So. 2d 1308 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)