Kapuscinski v. State
This text of 693 So. 2d 122 (Kapuscinski 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.
Opinion
Mark Kapuscinski has appealed from the denial of his motion to suppress, which we affirm. He has further contended, and the state has conceded, that the court erred in imposing costs of $105.00 without citation to statutory authority. See Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Accordingly, we reverse the costs order and remand. The state may seek reimposition of the costs with reference to the proper authority. Sutton v. State, 635 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).
Affirmed in part and remanded for further proceedings.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
693 So. 2d 122, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4974, 1997 WL 232259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kapuscinski-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.