Patterson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Patterson v. State

686 So. 2d 758, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 164, 1997 WL 24675

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 16, 1997

DocketNo. 96-602

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 686 So. 2d 758 (Patterson 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

Patterson v. State, 686 So. 2d 758, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 164, 1997 WL 24675 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, the public defender has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Although afforded an opportunity to do so, appellant has elected not to file a brief in proper person. Having reviewed the record, we agree that no reversible error occurred. Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence. However, we strike the public defender fee imposed, because appellant was afforded neither notice of intent to seek such a fee, nor an opportunity to contest its amount. E.g., Bryant v. State, 661 So.2d 1315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); L.A.D. v. State, 616 So.2d 106 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 624 So.2d 268 (Fla.1993). On remand, such a fee may again be imposed, provided that appellant is afforded notice and an opportunity to contest its amount.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED, with directions.

MINER, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, the public defender has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Although afforded an opportunity to do so, appellant has elected not to file a brief in proper person. Having reviewed the record, we agree that no reversible error occurred. Accordingly, we affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence. However, we strike the public defender fee imposed, because appellant was afforded neither notice of intent to seek such a fee, nor an opportunity to contest its amount. E.g., Bryant v. State, 661 So.2d 1315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); L.A.D. v. State, 616 So.2d 106 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 624 So.2d 268 (Fla.1993). On remand, such a fee may again be imposed, provided that appellant is afforded notice and an opportunity to contest its amount.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED, with directions.

MINER, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

686 So. 2d 758, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 164, 1997 WL 24675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack