Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

695 So. 2d 740

Whitfield v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 11, 1996

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1996-09-11

Relies on 624 So. 2d 263 - Jones v. Jones · In the Interest of L.A.D. v. State · Bryant v. State

Decided 1996-09-11

PER CURIAM.

¶1In this direct criminal appeal, appellant seeks review of his conviction for sale or delivery of cocaine. We affirm the conviction. However, we strike the $50.00 public defender fee imposed, because appellant was afforded neither notice of intent to seek such a fee, nor an opportunity to contest its amount. E.g., Bryant v. State, 661 So.2d 1315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); L.A.D. v. State, 616 So.2d 106 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 624 So.2d 268 (Fla.1993). On remand, such a fee may again be imposed, provided that appellant is afforded notice and an opportunity to contest its amount. We also strike the imposition of a $100.00 cost attributable to “CLTF,” because neither the order imposing this cost nor the transcript of the sentencing hearing identifies to what it is attributable, or its statutory basis. Bell v. State, 671 So.2d 226 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). To the extent that this sum represents an unidentified mandatory cost, on remand, the trial court may reimpose it, provided that it specifies the statute mandating imposition.

¶2AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
/695/so2d/740 · .json · Public domain