Futch v. State
Futch v. State
531 So. 2d 422; 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2242; 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4312; 1988 WL 99748
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Futch v. State
Opinion of the Court
We agree with appellant that the trial court erred in imposing court costs and a fee for the services of the public defender without notice or the opportunity to be heard. Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla. 1984); Barron v. State, 524 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Accordingly, we strike the cost provision without prejudice to the state to seek reassessment after proper notice to appellant. The judgment and sentence are affirmed in all other respects.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.