Montanez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Montanez v. State

275 So. 3d 1265

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 25, 2019

DocketCase No. 5D18-193

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 275 So. 3d 1265 (Montanez 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

Montanez v. State, 275 So. 3d 1265 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm Juan Francisco Montanez's judgment and sentence for trafficking in twenty-eight grams or more of heroin and possession of drug paraphernalia, but we reverse and remand the imposition of the $100 cost for the FDLE Operating Trust Fund pursuant to section 938.055, Florida Statutes (2018). The trial court failed to orally pronounce this cost at sentencing. See *1266Cain v. State, 197 So.3d 1096, 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (reversing and remanding $100 cost for FDLE Operating Trust Fund pursuant to section 938.055, because trial court failed to orally pronounce cost at sentencing hearing but noting that trial court could reimpose cost on remand). On remand, however, the trial court may reimpose the FDLE Operating Trust Fund cost after following the proper procedure. See Oliver v. State, 75 So.3d 349, 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (reversing imposition of discretionary fines and permitting trial court to reimpose the fines on remand "by following the proper procedure, which includes individually announcing each assessment and the authority for each"). In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

BERGER, HARRIS and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm Juan Francisco Montanez's judgment and sentence for trafficking in twenty-eight grams or more of heroin and possession of drug paraphernalia, but we reverse and remand the imposition of the $100 cost for the FDLE Operating Trust Fund pursuant to section 938.055, Florida Statutes (2018). The trial court failed to orally pronounce this cost at sentencing. See *1266Cain v. State, 197 So.3d 1096, 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (reversing and remanding $100 cost for FDLE Operating Trust Fund pursuant to section 938.055, because trial court failed to orally pronounce cost at sentencing hearing but noting that trial court could reimpose cost on remand). On remand, however, the trial court may reimpose the FDLE Operating Trust Fund cost after following the proper procedure. See Oliver v. State, 75 So.3d 349, 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (reversing imposition of discretionary fines and permitting trial court to reimpose the fines on remand "by following the proper procedure, which includes individually announcing each assessment and the authority for each"). In all other respects, we affirm.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

BERGER, HARRIS and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 So. 3d 1265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montanez-v-state-fladistctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack