Priest v. State

661 So. 2d 29, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12598, 1994 WL 714440
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 28, 1994·No. No. 93-04353·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and FULMER, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

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

Priest v. State, 661 So. 2d 29, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12598, 1994 WL 714440 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

661 So. 2d 29 (Priest v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tesky v. State
655 So. 2d 1323 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Heathcoe v. State
654 So. 2d 1258 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)