Staples v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Staples v. State

520 So. 2d 659, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 532, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 613, 1988 WL 12528

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 24, 1988·No. No. 87-2169·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant who contends the imposition of costs against him, potentially affecting his gain time, was improper. The state’s response to our order shows the defendant’s offenses oc[660] curred prior to July 1, 1985, the effective date of section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985). Accordingly, the assessment of costs against appellant violated the ex post facto clause. State v. Yost, 507 So.2d 1099 (Fla.1987). We reverse and remand with direction that the trial court vacate that part of the sentence which assessed costs against the appellant.

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant who contends the imposition of costs against him, potentially affecting his gain time, was improper. The state’s response to our order shows the defendant’s offenses oc[660] curred prior to July 1, 1985, the effective date of section 27.3455, Florida Statutes (1985). Accordingly, the assessment of costs against appellant violated the ex post facto clause. State v. Yost, 507 So.2d 1099 (Fla.1987). We reverse and remand with direction that the trial court vacate that part of the sentence which assessed costs against the appellant.

DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

Staples v. State, 520 So. 2d 659, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 532, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 613, 1988 WL 12528 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

520 So. 2d 659 (Staples v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related