Case ID: so2d_789/html/1043-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gregory Howard MITCHELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 1D99-3969.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    June 5, 2001.
    Opinion Denying Rehearing July 26, 2001.
    
      Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Fred P. Bingham, II, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Karen M. Holland, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the appellant’s convictions but conclude the trial court erred in imposing certain costs on the appellant. Specifically, we reduce the $4.00 award to the Bay County law library to $2.00. Sprouse v. State, 682 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Ch. 96-530, § 1, at 246-247, Laws of Fla. Also, we strike the $300 public defender fee because the trial court neglected to notify the appellant of his right to a hearing to contest the amount imposed. Snowden v. State, 685 So.2d 974, 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). On remand, the fee may be reimposed after the appellant is provided notice and an opportunity to be heard on the fee’s amount. Id. Furthermore, the $2,200 restitution award is reversed because it was not supported by evidence. Freeman v. State, 663 So.2d 675, 676 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). However, restitution may be ordered after an evidentiary hearing.

AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED and REMANDED in part.

ALLEN, VAN NORTWICK and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

The appellee filed a motion for rehearing on June 20, 2001 asserting this court overlooked or misapprehended points of fact and law. We deny the motion.

Although Bay County Ordinance 94-06 provides for a service charge in addition to the amount authorized by the Florida Legislature, the trial court could not require the appellant to pay more than what the legislature has authorized. See Majors v. State, 658 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)(holding defendant could not be required to pay a cost which exceeded the amount authorized by statute); Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111, 114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)(holding en banc that costs must be authorized by statute, not by a county ordinance); Williams v. State, 596 So.2d 758, 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)(striking a $300 fee assessed pursuant to a county court administrative order because it was not specifically authorized by statute).

Furthermore, the appellee asserts the appellant waived any objections to the law library fee, the public defender lien, and restitution by failing to object and acquiescing at the sentencing hearing. Those objections were not waived because the appellant filed a timely rule 3.800(b) motion. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(d)(pro-viding that a sentencing error may not be raised on appeal unless the alleged error has been brought to the trial court’s attention by an objection during sentencing or by a rule 3.800(b) motion); Moore v. State, 768 So.2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)(noting that a sentencing error could not be addressed by this Court because the issue was not raised through a contemporaneous objection or by a rule 3.800(b) motion); Campbell v. State, 745 So.2d 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)(holding that while the appellant did not object at sentencing to the imposition of a public defender lien, the issue could be addressed on appeal because the appellant filed a timely rule 3.800(b) motion with the trial cjurt).

Accordingly, the appellee’s motion for rehearing is denied.

ALLEN, C.J., and VAN NORTWICK and POLSTON, JJ., CONCUR.