GRANT SAMPSON MOORE vs STATE OF FLORIDA

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED GRANT SAMPSON MOORE, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D21-1767 LT Case Nos. 2020-CF-019249-A 2020-CF-022320-A 2020-CF-022750-A 2020-CF-032417-A STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed October 21, 2022 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County, David C. Koenig, Judge. Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Robert J. Pearce, III, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Daniel P. Caldwell, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. In this Anders 1 appeal, we affirm Appellant’s judgments and sentences. However, from our review of the record, it appears that in each of his four cases, Appellant was assessed additional court costs pursuant to section 318.18(11)(b), Florida Statutes (2018), even though he was not charged with a traffic offense. That statute does not authorize the costs assessed. Brevard County has been granted the authority to assess these particular costs (on non-traffic charges) by Chapter 87-423, 7(1)(a), Laws of Florida, as locally codified in Brevard County, Florida, Chapter 218, Article 1, section 218.2 (2022). We remand these cases back to the trial court with instructions to correct the judgments to reflect citation to the proper authority for assessment of these costs. AFFIRMED, REMANDED with instructions. LAMBERT, C.J., EDWARDS, and HARRIS, JJ., concur. 1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.