Summary
holding that "[t]he trial court erred in assessing investigative costs under section 938.27 . . . in the absence of a request from the State"
Summary of this case from Parks v. StateOpinion
Case No. 5D21-2504
05-20-2022
Javaughn SKINKLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Joseph Chloupek, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Joseph Chloupek, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM. In this Anders appeal, we affirm Javaughn Skinkle's judgment and sentence with one exception. The trial court erred in assessing investigative costs under section 938.27(1), Florida Statutes (2021), in the absence of a request from the State. See Richards v. State , 288 So. 3d 574, 577 (Fla. 2020) ("[T]he State must request investigative costs to make a defendant liable for those costs ...." (citation omitted)). We remand for the trial court to enter an amended judgment without including these investigative costs. In all other respects, we affirm. See State v. Dortch , 317 So. 3d 1074, 1084 (Fla. 2021) ("[T]here is no fundamental-error exception to the preservation requirement of rule 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)(c).").
Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
AFFIRMED; REMANDED with directions.
LAMBERT, C.J., EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.