Gawron v. State
597 So. 2d 340, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4365
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 8, 1992·No. Nos. 90-03430, 90-03431·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
We find merit only in Gawron’s argument that he was improperly ordered to pay $100 to the Hillsborough County Court Improvement Fund without being afforded adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard. Siplin v. State, 584 So.2d 599 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).
Accordingly, we strike the $100 without prejudice to the state to seek to reimpose this cost after giving Gawron proper notice and an opportunity to be heard.
Gawron’s judgments and sentences are affirmed, but the $100 cost is stricken.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Gawron v. State, 597 So. 2d 340, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4365 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).
597 So. 2d 340 (Gawron v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Reyes v. State
655 So. 2d 111 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Brenowitz v. Central Nat. Bank
597 So. 2d 340 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)