Nielson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nielson v. State

681 So. 2d 724, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4755, 1996 WL 239289

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 10, 1996

DocketNo. 95-00721

StatusPublished

This text of 681 So. 2d 724 (Nielson 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

Nielson v. State, 681 So. 2d 724, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4755, 1996 WL 239289 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kalen J. Nielson appeals his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery. We affirm his conviction without discussion. As to his sentence, however, we agree that the trial court erred in imposing a cost of prosecution and certain probation conditions. We strike condition (9), ordering payment to First Step, because no statutory authority was provided. See Luby v. State, 648 So.2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We strike the portion of condition (10), ordering Nielson to pay for random testing, because it was not orally pronounced at sentencing. See Luby. Last, we strike $80 assessed for costs of prosecution because the trial court failed to follow the statutory procedures. See Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111, 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (en banc).

Affirmed; cost of prosecution and certain probation conditions struck.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and BLUE and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Kalen J. Nielson appeals his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery. We affirm his conviction without discussion. As to his sentence, however, we agree that the trial court erred in imposing a cost of prosecution and certain probation conditions. We strike condition (9), ordering payment to First Step, because no statutory authority was provided. See Luby v. State, 648 So.2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We strike the portion of condition (10), ordering Nielson to pay for random testing, because it was not orally pronounced at sentencing. See Luby. Last, we strike $80 assessed for costs of prosecution because the trial court failed to follow the statutory procedures. See Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111, 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (en banc).

Affirmed; cost of prosecution and certain probation conditions struck.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and BLUE and WHATLEY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

681 So. 2d 724, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4755, 1996 WL 239289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nielson-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack