Ismael v. State

570 So. 2d 445, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9124, 1990 WL 191888
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 5, 1990
DocketNo. 89-0716
StatusPublished

This text of 570 So. 2d 445 (Ismael 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
Ismael v. State, 570 So. 2d 445, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9124, 1990 WL 191888 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As costs were assessed against appellant without benefit of notice and a hearing, we reverse the imposition of costs and remand based on Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988). We note that an identical argument was raised by the state in Beasley v. State, 565 So.2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA), review granted, No. 76,102 (Fla. June 7, 1990), wherein we certified the question of whether the imposition of costs against an indigent is different from the collection of those costs, making the question of ability to pay premature until attempt is made to collect such costs.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GUNTHER, STONE and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Mays v. State
519 So. 2d 618 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1988)
Beasley v. State
565 So. 2d 721 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
570 So. 2d 445, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9124, 1990 WL 191888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ismael-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.