S.D.J. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

S.D.J. v. State

21 So. 3d 140, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16552, 2009 WL 3672089

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 6, 2009·No. No. 5D09-1287·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from a juvenile disposition, the State concedes that the trial court erred by assessing costs of prosecution. See D.A. v. State, 11 So.3d 423 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (holding that section 938.27(1), Florida Statutes, does not authorize courts to impose costs of prosecution on a juvenile adjudicated delinquent). Accordingly, we remand with directions that these costs be stricken. In all other respects, the adjudication of delinquency and disposition are affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

MONACO, C.J., LAWSON and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from a juvenile disposition, the State concedes that the trial court erred by assessing costs of prosecution. See D.A. v. State, 11 So.3d 423 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (holding that section 938.27(1), Florida Statutes, does not authorize courts to impose costs of prosecution on a juvenile adjudicated delinquent). Accordingly, we remand with directions that these costs be stricken. In all other respects, the adjudication of delinquency and disposition are affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

MONACO, C.J., LAWSON and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.

S.D.J. v. State, 21 So. 3d 140, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16552, 2009 WL 3672089 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

21 So. 3d 140 (S.D.J. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related