Watrous v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Watrous v. State

696 So. 2d 839, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2720, 1997 WL 129185

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 21, 1997

DocketNo. 96-01214

StatusPublished

This text of 696 So. 2d 839 (Watrous v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Watrous v. State, 696 So. 2d 839, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2720, 1997 WL 129185 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Donald Watrous challenges a lien imposed in favor of Pasco County for attorney’s fees paid to his appointed appellate counsel. Watrous alleges the trial court erred by imposing the lien without giving him an opportunity to object to the amount of attorney’s fees awarded and by failing to determine his ability to pay before imposing the lien. We agree, in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Section 27.56(7), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that defendants must be given an opportunity to be heard and to object to the court’s determination on the amount of attorney’s fees and costs before a lien is imposed. In this case, the trial court imposed the $1,420 lien without giving Watrous this opportunity. Therefore, we remand with directions to give Watrous thirty days from the date of the mandate to file a written objection to the amount of the lien. If Wat-rous objects, the lien shall be stricken and a [840]*840new lien imposed based on the trial court’s findings following a fee hearing. Bourque v. State, 595 So.2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The trial court need not on remand make a determination as to appellant’s ability to pay the lien. See State v. Vamper, 579 So.2d 730 (Fla.1991)(a statutory hen for attorney’s fees and costs may be imposed upon an indigent defendant without a determination, at time of imposition, as to the defendant’s ability to pay).

Remanded with directions.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Donald Watrous challenges a lien imposed in favor of Pasco County for attorney’s fees paid to his appointed appellate counsel. Watrous alleges the trial court erred by imposing the lien without giving him an opportunity to object to the amount of attorney’s fees awarded and by failing to determine his ability to pay before imposing the lien. We agree, in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Section 27.56(7), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that defendants must be given an opportunity to be heard and to object to the court’s determination on the amount of attorney’s fees and costs before a lien is imposed. In this case, the trial court imposed the $1,420 lien without giving Watrous this opportunity. Therefore, we remand with directions to give Watrous thirty days from the date of the mandate to file a written objection to the amount of the lien. If Wat-rous objects, the lien shall be stricken and a [840]*840new lien imposed based on the trial court’s findings following a fee hearing. Bourque v. State, 595 So.2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). The trial court need not on remand make a determination as to appellant’s ability to pay the lien. See State v. Vamper, 579 So.2d 730 (Fla.1991)(a statutory hen for attorney’s fees and costs may be imposed upon an indigent defendant without a determination, at time of imposition, as to the defendant’s ability to pay).

Remanded with directions.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

696 So. 2d 839, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2720, 1997 WL 129185, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watrous-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack