Depetrillo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Depetrillo v. State

697 So. 2d 1283, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9300, 1997 WL 464295

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 15, 1997

DocketNo. 96-00589

StatusPublished

This text of 697 So. 2d 1283 (Depetrillo 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

Depetrillo v. State, 697 So. 2d 1283, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9300, 1997 WL 464295 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Nancy Depetrillo appeals her conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine. The public defender filed a brief pursuant to An-ders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree that the appeal has no merit except for the issue raised regarding attorney’s fees.

Depetrillo argues that the attorney’s fee lien must be stricken because the trial court failed to inform her of her right to contest the amount. On remand, Depetrillo shall have thirty days from the date of the mandate within which to file a written objection to the amount assessed. If an objection is filed with the trial court, the assessment shall be stricken and a new assessment shall not be imposed without notice and hearing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1). See Bourque v. State, 595 So.2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and FULMER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Nancy Depetrillo appeals her conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine. The public defender filed a brief pursuant to An-ders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree that the appeal has no merit except for the issue raised regarding attorney’s fees.

Depetrillo argues that the attorney’s fee lien must be stricken because the trial court failed to inform her of her right to contest the amount. On remand, Depetrillo shall have thirty days from the date of the mandate within which to file a written objection to the amount assessed. If an objection is filed with the trial court, the assessment shall be stricken and a new assessment shall not be imposed without notice and hearing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.720(d)(1). See Bourque v. State, 595 So.2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and FULMER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

697 So. 2d 1283, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9300, 1997 WL 464295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/depetrillo-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack