Legal Opinion

Renaud v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 18, 1995No. 94-2115PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant raises a number of issues on appeal, only two of which demonstrate reversible error. The first is that the trial court erred by imposing costs and fees on a per count basis instead of imposing costs as to the entire case. Hunter v. State, 651 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). The trial court also erred by ordering appellant to pay $1.00 a month to First Step, Inc. where said fee was not statutorily authorized. See Metz v. State, 650 So.2d 1135 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

We, therefore, remand with directions to strike the duplicative costs as well as the unauthorized fee.

WOLF, WEBSTER and VAN…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hunter v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  2. Metz v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Neal v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996
  2. Stephen Trusty v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2017
  3. Brenton McNeil v. State of FloridaSupreme Court of Florida · 2017
  4. Brenton McNeil v. State of FloridaSupreme Court of Florida · 2017
  5. McNeil v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API