Case ID: so3d_247/html/0721-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William G. ANDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 1D17-169
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    July 11, 2018
    Candice K. Brower, Regional Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Region One, Gainesville, and Michael J. Titus, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Region One, Tallahassee, for Appellant, and William G. Anderson, pro se.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
   Per Curiam.

In Appellant's direct criminal appeal, his counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We agree there are no meritorious issues for appeal, and affirm the judgment and sentence. However, Appellant correctly argues that the trial court erred in failing to give him notice and an opportunity to object to the fine imposed pursuant to section 775.083 of the Florida Statutes, and the accompanying surcharge assessed pursuant to section 938.04. Carmichael v. State , 192 So.3d 640, 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). This issue was preserved for appeal by the denial of Appellant's motion to correct sentencing error. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(b)(2). We therefore strike this fine and surcharge. The lower tribunal may, but is not required to, reimpose them on remand after following the proper procedure. See Nix v. State , 84 So.3d 424, 426 & n.2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (noting it may be an imprudent use of judicial resources to conduct further proceedings to impose a fine on a defendant who is serving a lengthy prison sentence).

Wolf, Bilbrey, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.