Daniel J. Diodato v. State

The imposition of the State’s investigative costs are challenged by the defendant in his appeal from a conviction and sentence for battery, assault, and deriving support from the proceeds of prostitution. He argues the trial court erred in assessing the cost of DNA and firearms testing when he was acquitted of the crimes as charged. 1 We disagree and affirm. We write due to the scarcity of case law on the issue.

The State charged the defendant by amended information with aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated assault with a firearm, and deriving support from the proceeds of prostitution.