FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2023-2240

LT Case No. 2019-CF-1513

_____________________________

JOSEPH M. VAVRA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County.

Steven B. Whittington, Judge.

Robert David Malove, and Hani Demetrious, of The Law Office of 

Robert David Malove, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

August 2, 2024

HARRIS, J.

In 2019, the State of Florida charged Appellant, Joseph 

Vavra, with ten counts of possession of child pornography.

Appellant subsequently entered a guilty plea, was adjudicated 

guilty on all ten counts, and was sentenced to thirteen years in 

prison on counts one through nine, to run concurrently, and five 

years of sex offender probation as to count ten. At the sentencing 
2

hearing, the court further imposed $418 in court costs, a $100

attorney fee, a $50 application fee, $151 for Crimes Against 

Minors, and a $151 Rape Crisis surcharge. Finally, the court 

imposed $150 in restitution to be paid to the Division of Victim 

Services. The written sentencing documents ordered Appellant to 

pay court costs, fees, and fines “as imposed at sentencing” in the 

total amount of $3,788. 

Appellant filed a motion to correct sentencing error pursuant 

to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), requesting that 

the court strike the order of restitution, issue a corrected order 

with statutory authority for costs and fees, and strike any nondiscretionary fines that conflict with the oral pronouncement. He 

correctly argued that the plea agreement made no mention of 

restitution, the transcript from his plea hearing did not mention 

restitution, and that the trial court did not determine that the 

restitution was caused by his offense or that it bore a significant 

relationship to the offense. Further, he argued that the court’s oral 

pronouncement imposed a total of $1,020 in costs, but the written 

order imposed $3,788 in “court costs, fees, and fines as imposed at 

sentencing” as a condition of probation. The motion was denied by 

the passage of time and this appeal followed.

In this appeal, Appellant argues the imposition of restitution 

was erroneous because the State did not request restitution and 

the record failed to establish a causal and significant relationship 

with his offense. He further argues that the imposition of $3,788 

in the written sentencing was erroneous because that amount 

conflicts with the oral pronouncement and did not include any 

statutory authority. The State agrees that the record does not 

support the imposition of $150 for restitution, as restitution was 

not mentioned anywhere in the record, and further agrees that the 

written judgment and sentence failed to reflect the costs imposed 

at sentencing.

“Where a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement of 

sentence and written sentencing documents, the oral 

pronouncement controls.” Chrystie v. State, 95 So. 3d 1027, 1028 

(Fla. 5th DCA 2012). Here, the total amount of costs and fines 

imposed during sentencing was $1,020, including the $150 in 

restitution ($870 without restitution). The written sentencing 
3

documents reflect a total amount of $3,788 without citing to any 

statutory authority. See V.D. v. State, 922 So. 2d 1037, 1038 (Fla. 

5th DCA 2006) (holding trial court must provide statutory basis 

for costs imposed). The State properly concedes that the case 

should be remanded so the costs may be properly included in the 

written order with statutory authority cited for each cost.

Accordingly, we strike the imposition of restitution and 

remand for entry of an order reflecting the correct amount of costs 

imposed at sentencing and the proper basis for each cost. 

RESTITUTION STRICKEN; CASE REMANDED FOR ENTRY OF 

CORRECTED COSTS ORDER.

MAKAR and WALLIS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________