Case ID: so2d_671/html/0276-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DANAHY, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert Anthony FANIEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 94-03940.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 10, 1996.
    James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Wayne S. Melnick, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and John Klawikofsky, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
   DANAHY, Judge.

The appellant argues on this appeal that his community control was improperly revoked and that his sentence included certain costs which were improper. Because there is no merit to his argument that the evidence was insufficient to show a violation of his community control, we affirm the revocation of the community control. We strike certain cost items found in the written sentence.

We strike the $2 cost pursuant to section 943.25(13) because it was not announced at sentencing. We also strike the “cost/fine” of $33 because no statutory authority was cited for this item.

With these costs stricken, we affirm the sentence imposed on violation of community control.

RYDER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.