History
  • No items yet
midpage
Rodriguez v. State
681 So. 2d 728
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1996
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of armed burglary of a dwelling, armed robbery, sexual battery, and kidnapping. He received three concurrent life sentences and life probation. He challenges the kidnapping conviction and the imposition of certain costs.

We find the trial court properly denied defense counsel’s motion for judgment of acquittal on the kidnapping count because the movement of the victim during the burglary and robbery satisfied the test laid out in Faison v. State, 426 So.2d 963 (Fla.1983).

We agree, however, with the appellant that it was error to impose the $2 discretionary cost pursuant to section 943.25(13), Florida Statutes (1993), because the trial court did not give the appellant notice of the imposition of this cost at sentencing. Reyes v. State, 655 So.2d 111 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (en banc). The assessment of a $433 “cost/ fine” was also error as it was not orally announced at sentencing. We note that it would be a better practice for the sentencing court to list orally all items of costs that it is imposing at sentencing instead of lumping them together in one announced figure as was done here.

Accordingly, we affirm the kidnapping conviction and sentence but strike the two cost items discussed above.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and SCHOONOVER, JJ„ concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Rodriguez v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: May 22, 1996
Citation: 681 So. 2d 728
Docket Number: No. 94-02032
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.