Zalanka v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zalanka v. State

573 So. 2d 1084, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1017, 1991 WL 15502

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 13, 1991

DocketNo. 90-1225

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 573 So. 2d 1084 (Zalanka 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

Zalanka v. State, 573 So. 2d 1084, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1017, 1991 WL 15502 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant entered a plea of no contest to the charge of armed trespass. The trial court adjudicated him guilty and placed him on probation for eighteen months with a special condition that he serve thirteen weekends in a work release program. At the time of sentencing the trial court failed to announce that it intended to include the assessment of costs totalling $225; nevertheless, it included those costs in its sentencing order. We hold that where costs are imposed upon a defendant without notice and opportunity to be heard, we must reverse the imposition of costs and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988) and Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1986).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DELL, POLEN and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant entered a plea of no contest to the charge of armed trespass. The trial court adjudicated him guilty and placed him on probation for eighteen months with a special condition that he serve thirteen weekends in a work release program. At the time of sentencing the trial court failed to announce that it intended to include the assessment of costs totalling $225; nevertheless, it included those costs in its sentencing order. We hold that where costs are imposed upon a defendant without notice and opportunity to be heard, we must reverse the imposition of costs and remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla.1988) and Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla.1986).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DELL, POLEN and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

573 So. 2d 1084, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 1017, 1991 WL 15502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zalanka-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack