Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

641 So. 2d 432

Docket No. 94-253.

Watson v. State

Kevel WATSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 5, 1994.

Rehearing Denied August 31, 1994.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-08-05

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 1995

6 state decisions

Relies on 419 So. 2d 1194 - Thomas v. Ratiner · 572 So. 2d 1368 - Larson v. State · 411 So. 2d 1361 - Bentley v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-08-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Sean K. Ahmed, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

¶2Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Belle B. Turner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

¶3COBB, Judge.

¶4The appellant Watson raises four points on appeal, claiming the trial court erred in (1) imposing drug offender probation without a record basis to do so; (2) ordering as a special condition of probation that Watson avoid bars and liquor stores; (3) ordering Watson to pay $1.00 per month to First Step of Volusia County; and (4) imposing a public defender's lien of $100.00 without noticed hearing.

¶5We reject Watson's first two points because, in the absence of a contemporaneous objection before the trial court, a defendant may appeal a condition of probation only if it is, in fact, illegal; if not, the failure to object is an absolute bar. Larson v. State, 572 So.2d 1368 (Fla. 1991). We do not find that the instant conditions imposed by the trial court are illegal, hence they do not constitute fundamental error. See also Boudreaux v. State, 578 So.2d 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Bentley v. State, 411 So.2d 1361 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), cert. denied, 419 So.2d 1195 (Fla. 1982).

¶6We agree with the appellant in respect to the $1.00 assessment for First Step of Volusia County and strike that portion of the order. See Eckenrode v. State, 638 So.2d 214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Gedeon v. State, 636 So.2d 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Botts v. State, 634 So.2d 197 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Thomas v. State, 633 So.2d 1122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). We also reverse the imposition of the fee for the public defender and remand for noticed hearing. Shipley v. State, 528 So.2d 902 (Fla. 1988); Klarstrom v. State, 610 So.2d 102 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). See also Dukes v. State, 639 So.2d 140 (Fla. 5th DCA July 1, 1994).

¶7AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

¶8HARRIS, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur.

/641/so2d/432 · .json · Public domain