Perkins v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Perkins v. State

684 So. 2d 305, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13056, 1996 WL 721554

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 13, 1996

DocketNo. 95-02085

StatusPublished

This text of 684 So. 2d 305 (Perkins 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

Perkins v. State, 684 So. 2d 305, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13056, 1996 WL 721554 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Counsel for Thomas Perkins filed an appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm the conviction; however, we reverse the order for court costs and the imposition of an attorney’s fee lien, and direct that the trial court correct the order of probation to reflect that Perkins entered a plea of nolo contendere.

The trial court ordered Perkins to pay $250 in mandatory court costs and imposed a $500 attorney’s fee lien. .Neither the order of court costs nor the attorney’s fee lien contained a citation to the proper statutory authority supporting the imposition of this cost and lien. That was error; therefore, we strike the $250 cost and the $500 attorney fee lien. See Sutton v. State, 635 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Upon remand, the state may seek to reimpose the cost and lien consistent with Sutton. Further, upon remand, the probation order must be corrected to reflect that Perkins entered a plea of nolo contendere instead of a plea of guilty.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., PARKER, J., and HALL, VINCENT T., Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Counsel for Thomas Perkins filed an appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm the conviction; however, we reverse the order for court costs and the imposition of an attorney’s fee lien, and direct that the trial court correct the order of probation to reflect that Perkins entered a plea of nolo contendere.

The trial court ordered Perkins to pay $250 in mandatory court costs and imposed a $500 attorney’s fee lien. .Neither the order of court costs nor the attorney’s fee lien contained a citation to the proper statutory authority supporting the imposition of this cost and lien. That was error; therefore, we strike the $250 cost and the $500 attorney fee lien. See Sutton v. State, 635 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Upon remand, the state may seek to reimpose the cost and lien consistent with Sutton. Further, upon remand, the probation order must be corrected to reflect that Perkins entered a plea of nolo contendere instead of a plea of guilty.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., PARKER, J., and HALL, VINCENT T., Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

684 So. 2d 305, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13056, 1996 WL 721554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perkins-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack