From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Faniel v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Apr 10, 1996
671 So. 2d 276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

Case No. 94-03940.

April 10, 1996.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Joe R. Young, Jr., Judge.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Wayne S. Melnick, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and John Klawikofsky, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


The appellant argues on this appeal that his community control was improperly revoked and that his sentence included certain costs which were improper. Because there is no merit to his argument that the evidence was insufficient to show a violation of his community control, we affirm the revocation of the community control. We strike certain cost items found in the written sentence.

We strike the $2 cost pursuant to section 943.25(13) because it was not announced at sentencing. We also strike the "cost/fine" of $33 because no statutory authority was cited for this item.

With these costs stricken, we affirm the sentence imposed on violation of community control.

RYDER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.


Summaries of

Faniel v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Apr 10, 1996
671 So. 2d 276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Faniel v. State

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT ANTHONY FANIEL, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Apr 10, 1996

Citations

671 So. 2d 276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)