Fanning v. State
537 So. 2d 197, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 247, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 210, 1989 WL 3275
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 20, 1989·No. No. 87-1928·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in imposing court costs and attorney fees without notice or the opportunity to be heard. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). Accordingly, we strike the cost provision without prejudice to the state to seek reassessment after proper notice to appellant. The judgments [198] and sentences are affirmed in all other respects.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Fanning v. State, 537 So. 2d 197, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 247, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 210, 1989 WL 3275 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).
537 So. 2d 197 (Fanning v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Christie v. State
538 So. 2d 544 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Ayers v. State
538 So. 2d 545 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)