WILSEY v. STATE (2023)

Appellant appeals her conviction and sentence based upon the trial court's determination that she had violated probation. We affirm the conviction without further discussion, concluding the issues which appellant raises are without merit.

As to the sentence, appellant sought a downward departure in her sentence based upon her claims of mental health issues. She contends that the court's comments at sentencing evinced an impermissible policy against granting downward departures based upon mental illness. Our review of the record shows that the court did not announce any such policy, and that the court's comments were directed to the specific facts of appellant's case. Thus, we affirm her sentence.

We reverse, however, the imposition of costs in the sentence. The court imposed a $200 cost of prosecution without evidence from the State to support the cost, nor an opportunity for appellant to object to the enhanced cost. The State concedes that the cost of prosecution should have been $100 pursuant to section 938.27(8), Florida Statutes (2021), because the State did not request a higher fee or provide proof of incurring higher costs. Bevans v. State, 291 So. 3d 591, 593–94 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020). Accordingly, the trial court erred in imposing the $200 in cost of prosecution. On remand, the trial court should reduce the cost to the statutory minimum of $100 or reimpose the additional costs if sufficient findings are made. Bartolone v. State, 327 So. 3d 331, 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Per Curiam.

Warner, Damoorgian and Conner, JJ., concur.