Jairious Elaina Culbertson v. State of Florida

Summary

The Sixth District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed Jairious Elaina Culbertson’s trespass conviction but reversed in part regarding the imposition and documentation of court costs. The court remanded for correction of the written sentence, including identifying the bases for costs, removing duplicative and inapplicable statutory costs, and correcting the surcharge amount.

Holdings

1. Any error arising from the admission of the witness's reference to Facebook pages concerning theft of a horse was harmless; the conviction was affirmed on that issue.
2. Due process requires that the basis for each imposed court cost be evident from the record, even though no statute or procedural rule requires the trial court to explain the basis for every cost in the written cost order.
3. There is no technical requirement that every written cost order cite the authority for each cost; due process is satisfied when the authority appears in the record or the basis for each cost is otherwise evident from the record.
4. It was improper to duplicate sections 938.05 and 939.185 in the sentence because Culbertson had only one conviction for trespass.
5. The section 938.04 surcharge should be $0 and should not appear in the written sentence because no fine was orally pronounced and the written sentence stated that no fine was included in the lump-sum amount.
6. Section 318.18 did not apply to Culbertson's trespass conviction and should not be included in the written sentence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred in denying Culbertson's motion for mistrial based on a State witness's reference to Facebook pages concerning theft of a horse.
2. Whether due process was satisfied when the record did not make evident the statutory or other bases for the lump-sum court costs imposed in the written sentence.
3. Whether the written sentence improperly duplicated sections 938.05 and 939.185.
4. Whether the written sentence improperly included a section 938.04 surcharge when no fine was imposed.
5. Whether section 318.18 applied to Culbertson's trespass conviction.

Disposition

other