Jami v. State

677 So. 2d 972, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8333, 1996 WL 441585
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 7, 1996
DocketNo. 95-02352
StatusPublished

This text of 677 So. 2d 972 (Jami 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
Jami v. State, 677 So. 2d 972, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8333, 1996 WL 441585 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reject the appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence and, therefore, affirm his judgment and sentences. We strike, however, the words “and pay for” from condition 8 of appellant’s orders of probation. Luby v. State, 648 So.2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We also strike the $33 cosVfine, which was imposed without the citation of statutory authority, without prejudice to the state seeking re-imposition on remand. Coby v. State, 666 So.2d 238 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

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

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

Related

Luby v. State
648 So. 2d 308 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Coby v. State
666 So. 2d 238 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
677 So. 2d 972, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8333, 1996 WL 441585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jami-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.