Fleming v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fleming v. State

573 So. 2d 449, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 684, 1991 WL 9394

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Fleming v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 524 So. 2d 1146 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 1, 1991·No. No. 90-02434·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment and sentence in this case. However, we strike the provision in the judgment which assesses court costs against appellant, because the record indicates these costs were imposed without prior notice or the opportunity to be heard. Our decision is without prejudice to the state to seek reimposition of costs after adequate notice to appellant.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and LEHAN and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment and sentence in this case. However, we strike the provision in the judgment which assesses court costs against appellant, because the record indicates these costs were imposed without prior notice or the opportunity to be heard. Our decision is without prejudice to the state to seek reimposition of costs after adequate notice to appellant.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and LEHAN and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.

Fleming v. State, 573 So. 2d 449, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 684, 1991 WL 9394 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

573 So. 2d 449 (Fleming v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.