Williams v. State

779 So. 2d 460, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13507, 2000 WL 1532883
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Williams v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 710 So. 2d 24
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 18, 2000·No. No. 2D97-4346·Published

Opinion

THREADGILL, Judge.

On this appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the appellant, Darryl Williams, challenges his judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine with intent to sell. We affirm Williams’ judgment and sentence without discussion; however, we conclude that the attorney’s fee lien imposed in the amount of $3,180, was entered without notice to Williams and an opportunity to be heard. See Davis v. State, 711 So.2d 1314 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). The record shows that, pursuant to Bain v. State, 730 So.2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), this error was properly preserved in the trial court. We therefore strike the fee lien. On remand, the trial court may reimpose the lien if, after proper notice and a hearing, it determines that such action is appropriate.

Affirmed in part; stricken in part; and remanded.

PATTERSON, C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur.

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

Williams v. State, 779 So. 2d 460, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13507, 2000 WL 1532883 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

779 So. 2d 460 (Williams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Davis v. State
711 So. 2d 1314 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Bain v. State
730 So. 2d 296 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)