Rhodes v. State of Florida

Opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-1945

_____________________________

DAVID JOHN RHODES,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County. James M. Colaw, Judge.

March 27, 2024

ON MOTION FOR WRITTEN OPINION

PER CURIAM.

We grant Appellant’s motion for written opinion, withdraw our per curiam affirmance dated February 12, 2024, and substitute the following opinion in its place. Appellant’s motion filed February 23, 2024, is otherwise denied.

David John Rhodes appeals his judgment and sentence for DUI manslaughter. He raises three issues on appeal. As to the first two issues, we affirm without further comment. In his third issue, Rhodes argues that the trial court erred by imposing a $100 cost of prosecution under section 938.27, Florida Statutes, without first receiving a request from the State. But as this Court has recently

2

explained, “the [$100] cost for the state attorney is a minimum cost that is mandated by subsection (8) and not an ‘investigative’ cost incurred by an agency, as described in § 938.27(1), which can only be imposed ‘if requested’ by the agency.” Parks v. State, 371 So. 3d 392, 392–93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023), review granted, SC2023-1355, 2024 WL 370043 (Fla. Jan. 31, 2024). On the facts presented, this cost was imposed properly.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, RAY, and NORDBY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

_____________________________

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and David Alan Henson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Damaris E. Reynolds, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.