Friend v. State

666 So. 2d 599, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 481, 1996 WL 26957
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 24, 1996·No. No. 94-2707·Published

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

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

666 So. 2d 599 (Friend v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fitts v. State
649 So. 2d 300 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Lee v. State
643 So. 2d 1187 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)