Imhoff v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Imhoff v. State

673 So. 2d 94, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4556, 1996 WL 210863

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 1, 1996

DocketNo. 94-03828

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 673 So. 2d 94 (Imhoff 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

Imhoff v. State, 673 So. 2d 94, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4556, 1996 WL 210863 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court sentenced the appellant to probation for one count of third degree grand theft and ordered her to pay, among other amounts which she does not challenge, $100 for costs of prosecution pursuant to section 939.01, Florida Statutes (1993), and $100 to the Court Improvement Fund. We reverse because we agree with the appellant that imposing these two items was error.

We strike the assessment for the Court Improvement Fund because there is no statutory basis for this cost. Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We also strike the cost of prosecution assessment because the state neither requested this cost nor documented any amount. Golden v. State, 667 So.2d 933 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court sentenced the appellant to probation for one count of third degree grand theft and ordered her to pay, among other amounts which she does not challenge, $100 for costs of prosecution pursuant to section 939.01, Florida Statutes (1993), and $100 to the Court Improvement Fund. We reverse because we agree with the appellant that imposing these two items was error.

We strike the assessment for the Court Improvement Fund because there is no statutory basis for this cost. Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We also strike the cost of prosecution assessment because the state neither requested this cost nor documented any amount. Golden v. State, 667 So.2d 933 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

673 So. 2d 94, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4556, 1996 WL 210863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/imhoff-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack