From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tennant v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 13, 2002
827 So. 2d 321 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

Case No. 5D02-2174

Opinion filed September 13, 2002 Rehearing Denied October 16, 2002.

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County, O.H. Eaton, Jr., Judge.

Jimmie L. Tennant, Jasper, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee.


Tennant appeals from the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) to correct sentence. He asserts the trial court failed to attach parts of the sentencing transcript which establish the validity of a $50,000.00 investigative cost judgment rendered against him in eleven 1993 Seminole County cases. He also contends that a public defender lien was imposed without notice or opportunity to be heard. We affirm.

Seminole County Case Nos. 93-3501, 93-3546, 93-3547, 93-3548, 93-3551, 93-3552, 93-3553, 93-3554, 93-3580, 93-3588, and 93-3590.

Tennant entered into a plea bargain with the state in the eleven cases which were consolidated for sentencing. Tennant states that part of the plea bargain contemplated an investigative cost judgment in favor of the Seminole County Sheriff's Office for $15,267.00. Tennant maintains in this proceeding that he did not contemplate or have notice of the additional investigative costs totaling $50,000.00, which the trial judge imposed at sentencing in favor of the state. Tennant also asserts that the court imposed a public defender lien in the amount of $1,500.00 without providing him notice of his right to contest the amount of the lien.

See generally, § 938.27(1), Fla. Stat. (2001).

The invalidity of the imposition of such cost judgments and public defender liens due to lack of notice and opportunity to challenge them, are matters which should have been objected to at sentencing and raised on direct appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89 (Fla. 2000); State v. Mike, 760 So.2d 145 (Fla. 2000). Further, because these matters involve issues of fact and procedure, they are not cognizable in the context of a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). See Robinson v. State, 692 So.2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Church v. State, 652 So.2d 911 (Fla.2d DCA 1995). These alleged errors do not produce an illegal sentence or fundamental error. Any issue concerning the voluntariness of Tennant's pleas in these eleven cases, should have been raised in a motion to withdraw his pleas prior to sentencing, or in a 3.850 motion filed thereafter. AFFIRMED.

After Tennant was sentenced, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170 was amended to allow a motion to withdraw plea to be filed within 30 days after sentencing. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.170(l) (effective January 1, 1997).

THOMPSON, CJ., and COBB, J., concur.


Summaries of

Tennant v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Sep 13, 2002
827 So. 2d 321 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Tennant v. State

Case Details

Full title:JIMMIE L. TENNANT, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Sep 13, 2002

Citations

827 So. 2d 321 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Citing Cases

Nix v. State

We affirm the denial of appellant's rule 3.800(a) motion to correct sentence, but without prejudice to…