Priest v. State
Opinion
The defendant, Herman Dejong Priest, appeals his judgment and sentence for robbery with a weapon.1 We find merit only in his contention that the trial court erred in imposing costs without notice and an opportunity to be heard. Accordingly, we strike the $2 discretionary costs imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993). See Sutton v. State, 635 So.2d 1032, 1033 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (discretionary costs “cannot be imposed unless a defendant is given notice and an opportunity to be heard, and the [30] record recites the statutory authority for their imposition”).
Reversed.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
661 So. 2d 29 (Priest v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.