Friend v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Friend v. State

666 So. 2d 599, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 481, 1996 WL 26957

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 24, 1996

DocketNo. 94-2707

StatusPublished

This text of 666 So. 2d 599 (Friend 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

Friend v. State, 666 So. 2d 599, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 481, 1996 WL 26957 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction for second degree grand theft and the sentence except for restitution. The evidence adduced by the state will support restitution of only the sum of $61,973, the amount of the check received by appellant in the scheme for which he stands convicted.

We follow the reasoning of Fitts v. State, 649 So.2d 300 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), and strike the probationary condition of not using intoxicants to excess because the condition was not pronounced at sentencing. We also strike the imposition of public defender and county commission fees because, apart from the failure to consider the defendant’s ability to pay, there was no documentation of the fees as required by section 939.01, Florida Statute (1993). Lee v. State, 643 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; RESTITUTION AND COSTS REVERSED.

GUNTHER, C.J., FARMER and KLEIN, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction for second degree grand theft and the sentence except for restitution. The evidence adduced by the state will support restitution of only the sum of $61,973, the amount of the check received by appellant in the scheme for which he stands convicted.

We follow the reasoning of Fitts v. State, 649 So.2d 300 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), and strike the probationary condition of not using intoxicants to excess because the condition was not pronounced at sentencing. We also strike the imposition of public defender and county commission fees because, apart from the failure to consider the defendant’s ability to pay, there was no documentation of the fees as required by section 939.01, Florida Statute (1993). Lee v. State, 643 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; RESTITUTION AND COSTS REVERSED.

GUNTHER, C.J., FARMER and KLEIN, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

666 So. 2d 599, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 481, 1996 WL 26957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friend-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack