Copeland v. State

497 So. 2d 292, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2271, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10258
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Copeland v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 12 Fla. L. Weekly 539
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 28, 1986·No. No. 84-2401·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

,We reject the defendant’s claims that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction, see Sorey v. State, 419 So.2d 810 (Fla.3d DCA 1982), rev. denied, 476 So.2d 675 (Fla.1985), and that the trial court’s reasons for upwardly departing from the presumptive guideline sentence were not clear and convincing, see Hankey v. State, 485 So.2d 827 (Fla.1986); Moore v. State, 468 So.2d 1081 (Fla.3d DCA 1985). We do, however, accept the State’s appropriate concession that the assessment of $15.00 in costs against the defendant without notice and hearing cannot stand, and that part of the judgment is, accordingly, ordered stricken. See Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984); Johnson v. State, 486 So.2d 657 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

Affirmed as modified.

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

Copeland v. State, 497 So. 2d 292, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2271, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10258 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

497 So. 2d 292 (Copeland 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)
Hankey v. State
485 So. 2d 827 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Johnson v. State
486 So. 2d 657 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Moore v. State
468 So. 2d 1081 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Sorey v. State
419 So. 2d 810 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)