Dozier v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dozier v. State

668 So. 2d 1010, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 739, 1996 WL 34854

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 31, 1996

DocketNo. 95-00252

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 668 So. 2d 1010 (Dozier 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

Dozier v. State, 668 So. 2d 1010, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 739, 1996 WL 34854 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PATTERSON, Judge.

The appellant challenges his judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school with intent to sell and for possession of marijuana with intent to sell. The appellant’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree with appellate counsel that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, with the exception of the issue of improperly imposed costs. Therefore, we affirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence and strike the $33 cost/fine imposed without statutory authority and the $2 discretionary cost imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), because it was not announced at sentencing. See Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

Affirmed in part; costs stricken.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., concur.

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

PATTERSON, Judge.

The appellant challenges his judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school with intent to sell and for possession of marijuana with intent to sell. The appellant’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree with appellate counsel that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, with the exception of the issue of improperly imposed costs. Therefore, we affirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence and strike the $33 cost/fine imposed without statutory authority and the $2 discretionary cost imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), because it was not announced at sentencing. See Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

Affirmed in part; costs stricken.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and QUINCE, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 So. 2d 1010, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 739, 1996 WL 34854, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dozier-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack