Johnson v. State

760 So. 2d 143, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 483, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1233, 2000 WL 766332
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Johnson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 769 So. 2d 990
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided June 15, 2000·No. No. SC96797·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review a decision of the First District Court of Appeal certifying the following question to be one of great public importance:

DOES THE FAILURE OF THE TRIAL COURT TO ORALLY PRO[144]*144NOUNCE EACH STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED COST INDIVIDUALLY AT THE TIME OF SENTENCING CONSTITUTE FUNDAMENTAL ERROR?

Johnson v. State, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D1192, — So.2d -, 1999 WL 303402 (Fla. 1st DCA May 14, 1999). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in our opinion in Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla.2000), we answer the certified question in the negative. We approve the decision below and find that the unpreserved sentencing errors asserted in this case do not constitute fundamental error.1

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

Johnson v. State, 760 So. 2d 143, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 483, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1233, 2000 WL 766332 (Fla. 2000).

760 So. 2d 143 (Johnson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McMullen v. State
714 So. 2d 368 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1998)
Wood v. State
750 So. 2d 592 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)
Maddox v. State
760 So. 2d 89 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)
Johnson v. State
766 So. 2d 225 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)