Background
Henry Alcantara appealed his conviction and sentence from the Circuit Court for Polk County. The trial court imposed both a sentence and various monetary obligations, including costs of prosecution and costs of supervision and monitoring. Alcantara appealed to the Sixth District Court of Appeal, challenging the judgment and sentence.
The Court’s Holding
The Sixth District affirmed Alcantara’s conviction and sentence in all respects. However, the court identified errors in the cost calculations imposed by the trial court and reversed those portions on a limited basis.
Specifically, the court reversed and remanded for correction of: (1) the monetary obligations order to exclude the $100 additional cost of prosecution as well as the various costs of supervision and monitoring, and (2) the judgment lien to exclude the $100 additional cost of prosecution. The court cited similar recent precedent requiring correction of erroneous cost assessments at sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- Appellate courts will scrutinize and reverse erroneous cost assessments even when convictions and sentences are otherwise affirmed.
- Costs of prosecution and supervision/monitoring costs must be properly authorized before inclusion in monetary obligations orders and judgment liens.
- Trial courts must ensure costs imposed comply with governing law to withstand appellate review.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces that appellate review extends to the financial component of criminal sentences. While Alcantara’s conviction stood, the court’s willingness to reverse on cost issues demonstrates heightened scrutiny of sentencing calculations and the importance of proper cost documentation and authorization.