Layton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Layton v. State

444 So. 2d 1102, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11500

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 27, 1984

DocketNo. 83-1121

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 444 So. 2d 1102 (Layton 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

Layton v. State, 444 So. 2d 1102, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11500 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case comes to us on appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Appellant has been given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief in proper person but has chosen not to respond. Accordingly, having reviewed both the Anders brief filed by the public defender and the record on appeal, we find no reversible error with respect to the judgment and sentence. “However, because the appellant was found insolvent by the trial court, that portion of the court’s order requiring the appellant to pay court costs and to make payments to the Victim’s Crime Compensation Fund is stricken.” Music v. State, 429 So.2d 101 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); see also Brown v. State, 427 So.2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

Affirmed as modified.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and BOARDMAN and RYDER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case comes to us on appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Appellant has been given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief in proper person but has chosen not to respond. Accordingly, having reviewed both the Anders brief filed by the public defender and the record on appeal, we find no reversible error with respect to the judgment and sentence. “However, because the appellant was found insolvent by the trial court, that portion of the court’s order requiring the appellant to pay court costs and to make payments to the Victim’s Crime Compensation Fund is stricken.” Music v. State, 429 So.2d 101 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); see also Brown v. State, 427 So.2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

Affirmed as modified.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and BOARDMAN and RYDER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

444 So. 2d 1102, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/layton-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack