Robinson v. State

993 So. 2d 1029, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 722, 2008 WL 183702
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Robinson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 907 So. 2d 1284
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 23, 2008·No. No. 2D06-2351·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Clifton Tavares Robinson seeks review of his judgment and sentence entered after a jury found him guilty of aggravated battery. Robinson raises five issues on appeal. Four of the five issues are without merit. We write to address the single meritorious issue that involves a minor sentencing error.

The trial court erred when it imposed $50 in prosecution costs because the State did not present any documentation that supported the imposition of these costs. See James v. State, 898 So.2d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Brentlinger v. State, 891 So.2d 1183, 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Ortiz v. State, 884 So.2d 77, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Robinson preserved this issue when he filed a motion to correct sentencing error in accordance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). The State concedes the error and agrees that the costs should be stricken. Accordingly, we reverse the imposition of the $50 in prosecution costs, and we remand for the trial court to strike these costs. In all other respects, we affirm Robinson’s judgment and sentence.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

WHATLEY, WALLACE, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.

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

Robinson v. State, 993 So. 2d 1029, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 722, 2008 WL 183702 (Fla. Ct. App. 2008).

993 So. 2d 1029 (Robinson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ortiz v. State
884 So. 2d 77 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Brentlinger v. State
891 So. 2d 1183 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
James v. State
898 So. 2d 1161 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)