Mercer v. State

Mercer v. State, 604 So. 2d 843 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided: July 1, 1992
Docket: No. 91-01357
Judges: Per Curiam
Citations: 604 So. 2d 8431992 WL 148220

Cited by 5

Opinion — Per Curiam

604 So.2d 843 (1992)

Jeffrey L. MERCER, Appellant,

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 91-01357.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 1, 1992.

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Stephen Krosschell, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm defendant's judgment which adjudicated him guilty of accessory after the fact. We also affirm his sentence except for certain probation conditions which we strike.

Condition 4, which requires defendant to obtain the consent of his probation officer to possess a firearm, is stricken. See Beckner v. State, 604 So.2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (a convicted felon may not lawfully possess a firearm). Condition 12 is stricken because it is a special condition of probation that was not orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing. See Tillman v. State, 592 So.2d 767 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Condition 17, which imposes attorney's fees, is stricken because defendant was not given notice of the opportunity to be heard concerning the amount of the fees. See Johnson v. State, 576 So.2d 916, 918 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

The portions of conditions 6, 9, 11, and 13 which restrict the consumption of alcohol, prohibit visiting places that sell alcohol, and require that the defendant be evaluated for alcohol abuse are stricken because they are special conditions of probation that were not orally pronounced at the sentencing hearing, nor are they reasonably *844 related to the crime committed. See Tillman.

Upon remand the foregoing conditions, and portions thereof, which have been stricken shall be deleted from the sentence. The attorney's fees are stricken without prejudice to the state again to seek the imposition of such fees with proper notice and opportunity to be heard.

Affirmed as modified.

LEHAN, C.J., and RYDER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →

State Appellate Courts5

Relies on it most ⓘ

Grate v. State623 So. 2d 591 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Chitty v. State661 So. 2d 26 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
Pagan v. State637 So. 2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
Crawford v. State616 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Houston v. State701 So. 2d 372 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Most recent

Houston v. State701 So. 2d 372 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)
Chitty v. State661 So. 2d 26 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
Pagan v. State637 So. 2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
Grate v. State623 So. 2d 591 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Crawford v. State616 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Tillman v. State, 592 So. 2d 767 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)	40
	Johnson v. State, 576 So. 2d 916 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)	18
	Beckner v. State, 604 So. 2d 842 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)	8

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list