Case Name: Ricky Lynn NORTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-10-16
Citations: 681 So. 2d 1186
Docket Number: No. 95-01488
Parties: Ricky Lynn NORTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: RYDER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 681
Pages: 1186–1187

Head Matter:
Ricky Lynn NORTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 95-01488.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Oct. 16, 1996.
Ronald N. Toward, Bartow, for Appellant and Ricky Lynn Norton, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Dale E. Tarpley, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Ricky Norton, pro se, filed a brief challenging certain probation conditions and costs/fines. We affirm the judgment, but strike the following conditions of probation and costs/ fines.
Norton argues and the state agrees that the portions of conditions 8 and 20 requiring Norton to pay for random drug testing and to pay for an evaluation for alcohol abuse must be stricken as they are special conditions of probation not orally pronounced. McCoy v. State, 675 So.2d 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Additionally, we strike condition 24, requiring an evaluation to determine the need for inpatient drug treatment; it is a special condition of probation which was not orally pronounced. State v. Hart, 668 So.2d 589 (Fla.1996).
Finally, we strike the $433.00 cost/ fine which was imposed without statutory authority, and the $2.00 cost imposed pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), since it was not orally pronounced at sentencing. Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)(en banc).
RYDER, A.C.J., and LAZZARA and QUINCE, JJ., concur.