Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Ste v. n K. NAVICKY, Appellant,

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal Steven Navicky claims that the trial court erred when instructing the jury on his entrapment defense. We affirm on that issue without further discussion. Navicky also complains that the court improperly taxed him with a cost pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2004). We agree. That statute is applicable to crimes committed after July 1, 2004. Waller v. State, 911 So.2d 226, 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); see also Cutwright v. State, 934 So.2d 667, 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Navicky's crime was committed on November 23, 2003. Accordingly, we strike the $65 court cost imposed pursuant to section 939.185, and remand to the circuit court to correct the judgment.

Navicky preserved this issue for appeal by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2).

Affirmed in part, cost stricken, and remanded.

NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

NAVICKY v. STATE
(Jan 26, 2007)