Rodriguez v. State

104 So. 3d 1199, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20876, 2012 WL 6030634
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rodriguez v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 1337
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 5, 2012·No. No. 1D11-6155·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s judgment and sentence. However, we find the trial court erred in imposing a $20 cost for the Crime Stoppers Trust Fund pursuant to section 938.06, Florida Statutes (2009). Because the trial court struck the fíne imposed on appellant in response to his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion, the court erred in failing to strike that cost. See Sanders v. State, 101 So.3d 373 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).

Further, we find the trial court erred in imposing a $100 public defender fee pursuant to section 938.29, Florida Statutes (2009), because appellant was not given notice and opportunity to be heard. See Clavelle v. State, 80 So.3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Therefore, we remand for the trial court to strike the $20 Crime Stoppers Trust Fund cost and to give appellant the opportunity to be heard on the public defender fee.

AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

WOLF, VAN NORTWICK and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

Rodriguez v. State, 104 So. 3d 1199, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20876, 2012 WL 6030634 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

104 So. 3d 1199 (Rodriguez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Clavelle v. State
80 So. 3d 456 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Sanders v. State
101 So. 3d 373 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)