State v. Vamper
This text of 579 So. 2d 730 (State v. Vamper) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Florida, Petitioner,
v.
Daniel Laverne VAMPER, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Anita J. Gay, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for petitioner.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Valerie Jones, Asst. Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Miami, for respondent.
McDONALD, Justice.
In Vamper v. State, 562 So.2d 816, 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), the district court certified the following question as being of great public importance:
Whether, subsequent to the effective date of chapter 86-154, Laws of Florida, inability to pay is a defense to the assessment (but not enforcement) of costs against a criminal defendant?
We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We considered a similar question in State v. Beasley, 580 So.2d 139 (Fla. 1991), and held that statutorily mandated costs may be imposed on an indigent defendant without actual notice and without a determination, at time of imposition, of the defendant's ability to pay. Therefore, we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the district court's affirmance of the assessment of statutory costs.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, BARKETT, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
579 So. 2d 730, 1991 WL 77648, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-vamper-fla-1991.