Sanders v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sanders v. State

189 So. 3d 946, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 4814, 2016 WL 1235576

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 30, 2016

Docket2D14-3535

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 189 So. 3d 946 (Sanders v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sanders v. State, 189 So. 3d 946, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 4814, 2016 WL 1235576 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

KELLY, Judge.

Najee Sanders challenges the revocation of his probation and the resulting sentence on his underlying conviction for felony battery. We affirm the revocation of Sanders’ probation and his sentence without comment, but reverse and remand because the circuit court erred in imposing certain costs. Sanders preserved his challenge to this sentencing error by filing a motion pursuant, to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). Although the record reflects that the circuit court granted Sanders’ motion, the motion was deemed denied when an amended sentence was not filed within the time specified by rule 3.800(b)(2).

At sentencing, the circuit court orally pronounced that “[mjinimum, mandatory costs [be] imposed as a lien.” The written sentence reflects various costs, but provides no statutory basis for their assessment. “The statutory authority for all costs imposed, whether they are mandatory or discretionary, must be cited in the written order.” Kirby v. State, 695 So.2d 889, 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Therefore, we strike the costs imposed. On remand, the circuit court may reimpose these costs if it provides statutory authority for their assessment. See id.; McGee v. State, 963 So.2d 931, 932 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

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

KHOUZAM and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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

KELLY, Judge.

Najee Sanders challenges the revocation of his probation and the resulting sentence on his underlying conviction for felony battery. We affirm the revocation of Sanders’ probation and his sentence without comment, but reverse and remand because the circuit court erred in imposing certain costs. Sanders preserved his challenge to this sentencing error by filing a motion pursuant, to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2). Although the record reflects that the circuit court granted Sanders’ motion, the motion was deemed denied when an amended sentence was not filed within the time specified by rule 3.800(b)(2).

At sentencing, the circuit court orally pronounced that “[mjinimum, mandatory costs [be] imposed as a lien.” The written sentence reflects various costs, but provides no statutory basis for their assessment. “The statutory authority for all costs imposed, whether they are mandatory or discretionary, must be cited in the written order.” Kirby v. State, 695 So.2d 889, 890 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Therefore, we strike the costs imposed. On remand, the circuit court may reimpose these costs if it provides statutory authority for their assessment. See id.; McGee v. State, 963 So.2d 931, 932 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

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

KHOUZAM and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 So. 3d 946, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 4814, 2016 WL 1235576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanders-v-state-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack