Bruce v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bruce v. State

152 So. 3d 111, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 19493, 2014 WL 6721071

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 26, 2014

DocketNo. 1D13-3147

StatusPublished

This text of 152 So. 3d 111 (Bruce 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

Bruce v. State, 152 So. 3d 111, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 19493, 2014 WL 6721071 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). As appellate counsel contends on appeal, Appellant’s motion to correct sentencing error filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), is deemed denied given that the trial court did not rule on the motion. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B); Bass v. State, 122 So.3d 1002, 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“Sixty days after the motion [to correct sentencing error filed pursuant to rule 3.800(b)(2)] was filed, the trial court’s jurisdiction ended and the motion was deemed denied.”). As to the merits of Appellant’s motion, we agree with appellate counsel that the written judgment erroneously cites Appellant’s aggravated battery conviction as a violation of section 787.01(l)(a)3., Florida Statutes, instead of section 784.045(l)(a). We also agree that the trial court erred in imposing a $415 court cost pursuant to section 775.083(2), Florida Statutes, instead of the statutorily authorized fee of $50 for a felony. We, therefore, reverse and remand for correction of the written judgment and sentence to reflect the correct statute and statutory cost. As we explained in Harrison v. State, 146 So.3d 76, 78 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), “If other authorized costs were consolidated in this $415.00 assessment, the trial court may reimpose the authorized sums following the appropriate procedure.”

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with instructions.

LEWIS, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and SWANSON, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). As appellate counsel contends on appeal, Appellant’s motion to correct sentencing error filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), is deemed denied given that the trial court did not rule on the motion. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2)(B); Bass v. State, 122 So.3d 1002, 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“Sixty days after the motion [to correct sentencing error filed pursuant to rule 3.800(b)(2)] was filed, the trial court’s jurisdiction ended and the motion was deemed denied.”). As to the merits of Appellant’s motion, we agree with appellate counsel that the written judgment erroneously cites Appellant’s aggravated battery conviction as a violation of section 787.01(l)(a)3., Florida Statutes, instead of section 784.045(l)(a). We also agree that the trial court erred in imposing a $415 court cost pursuant to section 775.083(2), Florida Statutes, instead of the statutorily authorized fee of $50 for a felony. We, therefore, reverse and remand for correction of the written judgment and sentence to reflect the correct statute and statutory cost. As we explained in Harrison v. State, 146 So.3d 76, 78 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), “If other authorized costs were consolidated in this $415.00 assessment, the trial court may reimpose the authorized sums following the appropriate procedure.”

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with instructions.

LEWIS, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and SWANSON, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 So. 3d 111, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 19493, 2014 WL 6721071, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bruce-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack