Background
Aaron William Gilbreth pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor charges: resisting an officer without violence and criminal mischief. The trial court sentenced him to twelve months of probation on count one and concurrent six-month probation on count two. At sentencing, the court orally imposed “standard court costs and costs of prosecution.” However, the written judgment erroneously assessed two separate $50 “Cost of Prosecution SAO Revenue” assessments under Florida Statutes section 938.27(8), resulting in a total of $100 in prosecution costs.
Gilbreth filed a timely Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error, arguing that the prosecution cost had been improperly imposed twice—once for each count in a single case. The trial court failed to enter a written order on the motion, and it was therefore deemed denied.
The Court’s Holding
The Second District affirmed Gilbreth’s convictions and sentences but reversed the denial of his sentencing correction motion. The court held that section 938.27(8) establishes a mandatory minimum of $50 in prosecution costs per case (not per charge) when a misdemeanor is charged. Costs above the statutory minimum are permitted only “upon a showing of sufficient proof of higher costs incurred.”
The court found that nothing in the record demonstrated that the State sought costs above the minimum, that the trial court made findings supporting a higher amount, or that the court orally announced an increased cost of prosecution at sentencing. Following established precedent from Kee v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2024), when a trial court fails to make appropriate factual findings or oral pronouncements regarding prosecution costs above the statutory minimum, those costs must be reduced to the mandatory minimum.
Accordingly, the court remanded with instructions for the trial court to strike one of the duplicative $50 assessments, reducing the total prosecution cost to $50.
Key Takeaways
- Prosecution costs under section 938.27(8) are assessed on a per-case basis, not per-charge, preventing double-charging in multi-count cases consolidated for sentencing.
- Trial courts must make explicit factual findings and oral pronouncements at sentencing when imposing prosecution costs above the statutory $50 minimum.
- Without such findings and pronouncements, prosecution costs default to the mandatory minimum amount.
Why It Matters
This decision clarifies an important limitation on sentencing discretion in Florida misdemeanor cases. The opinion reinforces that prosecution cost assessments are tied to the case, not individual charges, protecting defendants from duplicative assessments when multiple misdemeanor counts are resolved in a single sentencing proceeding.
The ruling also strengthens procedural protections by requiring trial courts to make explicit oral and written findings before imposing costs above statutory minimums. This standard prevents arbitrary increases in financial burdens imposed on defendants without proper judicial deliberation and record-making.