Home/Supreme Court of Florida/State v. Matke

State v. Matke

761 So. 2d 317, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 484, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1217, 2000 WL 766483
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJune 15, 2000
DocketNo. SC92476
StatusPublished

This text of 761 So. 2d 317 (State v. Matke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Matke, 761 So. 2d 317, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 484, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1217, 2000 WL 766483 (Fla. 2000).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the decision in Matke v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D469, — So.2d -, 1998 WL 55968 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 13, 1998), on the basis of certified conflict. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in our opinion in Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla.2000), we quash the decision below and find that the unpre-served sentencing error in this case regarding costs does not constitute fundamental error.

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Maddox v. State
760 So. 2d 89 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)
Matke v. State
765 So. 2d 52 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
761 So. 2d 317, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 484, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1217, 2000 WL 766483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-matke-fla-2000.