Pitonack v. State
This text of 572 So. 2d 1041 (Pitonack 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.
Opinion
We reverse the imposition of costs in the sentence and remand so that the trial judge may either strike the costs or conduct a hearing to impose costs. Shipley v. State, 528 So.2d 902 (Fla.1988); Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1984). We also reverse the imposition of public defender fees as this record does not reflect notice and the opportunity to be heard prior to imposition. Therefore, Bull v. State, 548 So.2d 1103 (Fla.1989) is not controlling. We decline to again certify the question already certified in Beasley v. State, 565 So.2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
572 So. 2d 1041, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 402, 1991 WL 4321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitonack-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.