King v. State
King v. State
575 So. 2d 1380; 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2200; 1991 WL 32997
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
King v. State
Opinion of the Court
We affirm the defendant’s judgment of conviction and sentence. However, we hold that the trial court erred in imposing court costs without notice and opportunity to be heard. Clark v. State, 560 So.2d 264 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Rowe v. State, 558 So.2d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Therefore, we strike the imposition of costs without prejudice and remand this cause to the trial court in order for the state to seek reimpo-sition of costs after proper notice and opportunity to be heard.
JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; COSTS STRICKEN and CAUSE REMANDED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.