From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Acosta v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Mar 11, 2022
335 So. 3d 210 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022)

Opinion

Case No. 5D21-1673

03-11-2022

Edwin ACOSTA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Glendon G. Gordon, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.


Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Glendon G. Gordon, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this Anders case, we affirm Appellant's judgement and sentence. However, we remand for the trial court to strike the $3.00 cost imposed in error under section 318.18, Florida Statutes (2019), as Appellant was not charged with a traffic infraction. See Sorenson v. State, 291 So. 3d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020).

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

AFFIRMED, and REMANDED with Instructions.

LAMBERT, C.J. , WALLIS and TRAVER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Acosta v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Mar 11, 2022
335 So. 3d 210 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022)
Case details for

Acosta v. State

Case Details

Full title:Edwin ACOSTA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Date published: Mar 11, 2022

Citations

335 So. 3d 210 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022)