Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

575 So. 2d 307

Docket No. 90-01028.

Pope v. State

Edith Shadwick POPE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 27, 1991.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1991-02-27

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1995

4 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1991-02-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*308 James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Robert D. Rosen, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Wendy Buffington, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4The appellant, Edith Shadwick Pope, challenges the trial court's determination that she make restitution payments totaling $1,330.28. We find no merit in her contention that the state did not present sufficient competent evidence to establish the amount of restitution. We agree, however, that the court erred by not allowing the appellant to testify at the restitution hearing with regard to her ability to pay restitution. See § 775.089(6), Fla. Stat. (1987). We, accordingly, reverse and remand for another restitution hearing.

¶5We also strike the court costs and attorney's fees without prejudice to the state to seek reimposition after proper notice and opportunity to be heard.

¶6Reversed and remanded.

¶7SCHOONOVER, C.J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.

/575/so2d/307 · .json · Public domain