From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peterson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 12, 1989
543 So. 2d 358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Opinion

No. 88-1651.

May 12, 1989.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Okaloosa County, Erwin Fleet, J.

Michael E. Allen, Public Defender and Maria Ines Suber, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Bradley R. Bischoff, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.


Appellant David Eugene Peterson appeals from his convictions for five counts of third degree burglary and the sentences imposed therefor. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.

Neither of appellant's first two issues are meritorious. First, the stop was a valid traffic stop, because appellant's vehicle was obstructing a roadway. Second, the trial judge's resolution against appellant of the conflicting evidence dealing with the consensual search issue is supported by the record. See State v. Stephens, 441 So.2d 171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Finally, appellant's sentences were within the recommended guidelines sentencing range and none of the individual sentences exceeded the statutory maximum. § 810.02(1), (3), Fla. Stat. (1987); § 775.082(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (1987).

Appellant was sentenced to 24 months' incarceration for the first count, to a consecutive 5-year probationary term for the second count, and to 5-year probationary terms for the last three counts, each of those sentences to be served concurrently, but consecutive to the sentences imposed for counts one and two.

Appellant's recommended guideline sentence was community control or 12-30 months' incarceration.

We do, however, find merit in appellant's third point that the trial court erred by imposing court costs and attorney's fees without prior notice. Mays v. State, 519 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1988); Jenkins v. State, 444 So.2d 947 (Fla. 1984); Goodling v. State, 482 So.2d 594 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). The fact that no contemporaneous objection was made at the time the costs and fees were imposed does not preclude appellate review of the issue. Harriel v. State, 520 So.2d 271 (Fla. 1988). Therefore, those parts of the sentences assessing costs and fees must be reversed and the case remanded to the trial court for further consistent proceedings.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Peterson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 12, 1989
543 So. 2d 358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)
Case details for

Peterson v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID EUGENE PETERSON, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 12, 1989

Citations

543 So. 2d 358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Citing Cases

Boudreaux v. State

The fact that the appellant did not object to this condition does not preclude appellate review. Peterson v.…