Gary A. Engeseth v. State of Florida

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC95003 ____________ GARY A. ENGESETH Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [June 15, 2000] PER CURIAM. We have for review a decision of the First District Court of Appeal certifying the following question to be one of great public importance: DOES THE FAILURE OF THE TRIAL COURT TO ORALLY PRONOUNCE EACH STATUTORILY AUTHORIZED COST INDIVIDUALLY AT THE TIME OF SENTENCING CONSTITUTE FUNDAMENTAL ERROR? Engeseth v. State, 725 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in our opinion in Maddox v. State, 25 Fla. L. Weekly S367 (Fla. May 11, 2000), we answer the certified question in the negative. We approve the decision below and find that the unpreserved sentencing errors asserted in this case do not constitute fundamental error. It is so ordered. HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal Certified Direct Conflict of Decisions First District - Case No. 1D97-3857 (Escambia County) Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Kathleen Stover, Assistant Public Defender, Second Judicial Circuit, Tallahassee, Florida, for Petitioner Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and James W. Rogers, Bureau Chief, Criminal Appeals, Tallahassee, Florida, for Respondent -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.