When someone is sentenced in a criminal case, the judgment often includes more than jail time or probation. It can also include fees and costs. Some of those charges are authorized by law, and some are not.
Small fees may seem minor, but they are still part of a sentence, and a sentence is supposed to reflect only what the law actually allows. When a fee is imposed under a statute that does not apply to criminal cases, it can be challenged on appeal.
That is what happened in Delacruz v. State, a recent decision from Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal. The court left the underlying conviction in place but corrected the sentence by removing a fee it found should not have been charged.
Key Takeaway
A fee authorized only for certain matters cannot be tacked onto a criminal sentence, and an appellate court can order it struck while leaving the conviction untouched.
What happened in this case?
Ciriaco Delacruz appealed his judgment and sentences after proceedings in the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County. He raised challenges to both the conviction and the sentence.
The appellate court affirmed the judgment without further discussion, meaning the conviction itself stood. The court’s attention turned instead to a specific cost included in the sentence.
What was the problem with the fee?
The trial court had imposed a $10.00 recording fee under section 28.24(13), Florida Statutes (2024). The appellate court explained that this particular statute does not apply to criminal cases.
Because the fee was authorized only outside the criminal context, imposing it as part of a criminal sentence was not permitted.
What did the court decide?
The Second District affirmed the judgment but reversed the sentences to the extent they included the improper recording fee. It sent the case back with instructions for the trial court to strike that fee.
Everything else about the sentences was affirmed. In other words, the correction was narrow and targeted only the one charge that lacked legal authorization.
Why does this matter to people facing charges?
This decision illustrates a broader principle: the costs and fees in a criminal sentence must rest on a statute that actually applies. A charge drawn from the wrong statute does not become valid simply because it is small.
It also shows that an appeal can succeed on a limited issue. A court can reject the challenge to a conviction while still correcting a discrete error in the financial portion of a sentence.
What is the bottom line?
The court affirmed the conviction, removed a $10.00 recording fee that did not apply to criminal cases, and returned the matter so the trial court could strike that fee. The remaining parts of the sentence were left intact.
Disclaimer: This post is for general information only, is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client relationship, and does not predict or guarantee any result. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before deciding, ask for free written information about the lawyer’s qualifications and experience.