From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayden v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Mar 17, 2000
753 So. 2d 720 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

holding that the trial court erred in assessing costs for the juvenile assessment center and Teen Court Program because the statute authorizing those assessments was enacted after the date of the juvenile's offenses

Summary of this case from J.J. v. State

Opinion

No. 2D96-4774.

Opinion filed March 17, 2000.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Chet A. Tharpe, Judge.

Valeria Hendricks of Davis Scarritt, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Diana K. Bock, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.


We affirm Kenneth Deon Hayden's conviction and sentence for burglary of a dwelling, but we remand for correction of his written sentence and we strike certain costs. Hayden notes, and the State correctly concedes, that his written sentence erroneously directs that his sentence for this conviction be served consecutively to that imposed in case number 96-3746. At the sentencing hearing the court had pronounced that the sentences were to be served concurrently. Accordingly, we remand this case for correction of the written sentence to comport with the trial court's oral pronouncement. See Smith v. State, 695 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

We also agree with Hayden's contention that the trial court should not have imposed costs for the Juvenile Assessment Center and the Teen Court Program because those costs assessments were not enacted until after the date of his offenses. See §§ 39.019 and 775.0833, Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1996). Therefore, we strike these costs. See Pierce v. State, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D2051 (Fla. 2d DCA Sept. 4, 1998), quashed on other grounds, 734 So.2d 399 (Fla. 1999).

Affirmed in part, remanded for correction of sentence, and costs stricken.

GREEN and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

Hayden v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Mar 17, 2000
753 So. 2d 720 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

holding that the trial court erred in assessing costs for the juvenile assessment center and Teen Court Program because the statute authorizing those assessments was enacted after the date of the juvenile's offenses

Summary of this case from J.J. v. State

holding cost assessment for juvenile assessment center and teen court program could not be imposed where statutes authorizing imposition of such costs were enacted after date of defendant's offenses

Summary of this case from Ridgeway v. State
Case details for

Hayden v. State

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH DEON HAYDEN, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Mar 17, 2000

Citations

753 So. 2d 720 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Whitaker v. State

Mr. Whitaker lodged no objection to these costs and did not file a motion to correct a sentencing error. See…

Ridgeway v. State

See id. Assessment of costs violates ex post facto prohibitions only when the length of an inmate's sentence…