Court Opinion

ID: 9408346
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-12 15:06:29.871657+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:43.398105
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                             FOURTH DISTRICT

                           DAVID BLAISDELL,
                               Appellant,

                                    v.

                          STATE OF FLORIDA,
                               Appellee.

                             No. 4D22-1603

                             [July 12, 2023]

  Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St.
Lucie County; William L. Roby, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562021CF002462A.

  Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Gary Lee Caldwell, Assistant
Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

   Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jonathan P. Picard,
Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

   We affirm the defendant’s conviction for violating section 836.10,
Florida Statutes (2021). We also affirm the sentence with respect to the
defendant’s claimed entitlement of additional county jail time credit
against his consecutive prison terms. However, we accept the State’s
concession of error with respect to the trial court’s assessment of $50 in
investigative costs that were never requested by the State at sentencing.
See Richards v. State, 288 So. 3d 574, 576-77 (Fla. 2020) (imposition of
investigative costs in the absence of a request by the State for such costs
at sentencing is reversible error).

   We therefore reverse the investigative costs assessment and remand
with directions that these costs be stricken from the judgment. See
Richards, 288 So. 3d at 576 (“clear and unambiguous” language of statute
authorizing investigative costs does not permit the State to “get the
proverbial ‘second bite at the apple’ when it fails to satisfy [its] legal
obligation the first time around” with respect to requesting such costs at
sentencing); Rivera v. State, 336 So. 3d 738, 741 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (the
State is not permitted to seek investigative costs on remand when the
assessment of such costs is reversed based on the failure to request them
prior to judgment).

   Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

WARNER, GERBER and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

                           *        *         *

    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                                    2