State v. Bynes

784 So. 2d 1145, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2090, 2001 WL 193859
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 28, 2001·No. No. 2D00-653·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The State appeals the youthful offender sentence imposed on Keith Bynes in lieu of a mandatory 20-year sentence under the “10-20 Life” statute, section 775.087, Florida Statutes (1999). We affirm. See State v. Wooten, No. 2D00-1004, 782 So.2d 408, 2001 WL 76995 (Fla. 2d DCA filed Jan. 31, 2001).

Mr. Bynes cross-appeals the imposition of certain conditions of probation. Mr. Bynes preserved these errors by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2).1 The State has conceded error. We therefore remand to strike conditions 2, 12 and 19 from the order of probation. Because condition 19 was a discretionary cost that may be reimposed after notice and an opportunity to be heard, the striking of that condition is without prejudice. See Gant v. State, 682 So.2d 1137 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

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

State v. Bynes, 784 So. 2d 1145, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2090, 2001 WL 193859 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

784 So. 2d 1145 (State v. Bynes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Oglester
830 So. 2d 124 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Browning v. Browning
784 So. 2d 1145 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)