Digangi v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Digangi v. State

488 So. 2d 626, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1125, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7814

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 14, 1986·No. No. 85-1164·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery and grand theft. He contends the trial court erred in imposing fines, restitution, and a public defender’s fee when he was indigent. The State concedes that the case must be remanded for a determination of appellant’s ability to pay. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). Furthermore, the trial court should also correct the conflict between the oral pronouncement at sentencing and the trial court’s written order regarding the fine in Count II.

REMANDED FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT HEREWITH.

DOWNEY, WALDEN, and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated battery and grand theft. He contends the trial court erred in imposing fines, restitution, and a public defender’s fee when he was indigent. The State concedes that the case must be remanded for a determination of appellant’s ability to pay. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). Furthermore, the trial court should also correct the conflict between the oral pronouncement at sentencing and the trial court’s written order regarding the fine in Count II.

REMANDED FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT HEREWITH.

DOWNEY, WALDEN, and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

Digangi v. State, 488 So. 2d 626, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1125, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7814 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

488 So. 2d 626 (Digangi v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related