King v. State
575 So. 2d 1380, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2200, 1991 WL 32997
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in King v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 557 So. 2d 899 →
Opinion
We affirm the defendant’s judgment of conviction and sentence. However, we hold that the trial court erred in imposing court costs without notice and opportunity to be heard. Clark v. State, 560 So.2d 264 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Rowe v. State, 558 So.2d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Therefore, we strike the imposition of costs without prejudice and remand this cause to the trial court in order for the state to seek reimpo-sition of costs after proper notice and opportunity to be heard.
JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; COSTS STRICKEN and CAUSE REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
King v. State, 575 So. 2d 1380, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2200, 1991 WL 32997 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).
575 So. 2d 1380 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rowe v. State
558 So. 2d 174 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Clark v. State
560 So. 2d 264 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)