Garrett v. State

262 So. 3d 267
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 18, 2019
DocketCase Nos. 5D18-816; 5D18-817; 5D18-818; 5D18-819
StatusPublished

This text of 262 So. 3d 267 (Garrett 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
Garrett v. State, 262 So. 3d 267 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Richard S. Garrett, Jr., appeals the imposition of costs, arguing that the trial court erred in failing to cite statutory authority for the same. We agree and reverse the order imposing costs.

"The statutory authority for all costs imposed, whether they are mandatory or discretionary, must be cited in the written order." Hornstra v. State , 218 So.3d 979, 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (quoting Kirby v. State , 695 So.2d 889, 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) ). We therefore reverse the order of costs and remand so that the State "may seek reimposition" of costs. Kirby , 695 So.2d at 890. We otherwise affirm.

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

EVANDER, C.J., EISNAUGLE and HARRIS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Kirby v. State
695 So. 2d 889 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Jacob Hornstra v. State
218 So. 3d 979 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
262 So. 3d 267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garrett-v-state-fladistctapp-2019.