Background
Sean Gabriel Alleyne entered a global plea agreement in two related cases stemming from charges of failing to register a vehicle and driving with a suspended license. At the sentencing hearing in case 2023-CT-3808, the trial court orally pronounced that Alleyne would pay $273 in court costs and stated “I’m waiving the application fee in this case.” However, the written judgment contradicted the oral pronouncement, imposing $274 in court costs and a $50 public defender application fee.
Alleyne appealed and filed a motion to correct sentencing error under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2), raising three grounds: (1) the written sentence in case 2023-CT-3808 failed to conform to the oral pronouncement; (2) the trial court failed to provide the statutory basis for court costs in both cases; and (3) the written sentence improperly included the $50 public defender application fee that was orally waived. The trial court did not rule on the motion within 60 days, resulting in its deemed denial.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that while oral pronouncements generally control over written sentences when discrepancies exist, the $50 public defender application fee is mandatory under Florida Statutes sections 27.52 and 938.29 and cannot be waived by the trial court. Although the trial judge erred in orally waiving the fee, the written sentence properly imposed it in accordance with mandatory statutory requirements. Therefore, the court declined to remand to remove the fee from the written sentence.
The court corrected the amount discrepancy, holding that the $274 figure in the written judgment must be corrected to $273 to conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. Regarding the court costs generally, the court remanded the case for the trial court to provide a sufficient explanation of the basis for each cost imposed. While the court acknowledged that trial courts are not required to cite statutory authority in every written cost order, due process requires that “the basis for each cost is otherwise evident in the record” or supported by citation to authority. Here, the record did not clearly establish the foundation for the costs imposed.
Key Takeaways
- Public defender application fees under §27.52(1)(b) are mandatory and cannot be waived by trial courts, even when orally pronounced as waived at sentencing.
- When an oral pronouncement conflicts with a written sentence, the oral pronouncement controls—except where mandatory statutory terms apply, in which case the written sentence prevails.
- Trial courts must provide sufficient explanation in the record for the basis of court costs imposed, even if explicit statutory citations are not always required.
- Appellate courts may decline to remand for conformity between oral and written sentences when the written sentence correctly imposes mandatory, non-discretionary terms omitted from the oral pronouncement.
Why It Matters
This decision clarifies the limits of trial court discretion in sentencing and cost assessments. While the general principle that oral pronouncements control written sentences is well-established, this opinion demonstrates that principle yields to mandatory statutory requirements. Trial judges cannot use their discretion to waive fees that the legislature has made mandatory, regardless of what is stated from the bench.
The remand regarding the lack of articulated basis for court costs reinforces due process protections in sentencing and may require trial courts to be more explicit about the statutory or factual foundation for each cost imposed. This impacts both trial court practices and appellate review of cost assessments, as the record must now clearly support the imposition of each individual cost.
✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.