County Traffic Court: TRAFFIC INFRACTIONS -trial court did error in charging appellant $30.00 for a "moving violation"; appellant's court costs should be reduced to $16.00- remainder of order affirmed since   appellant failed to demonstrate any error in the record. Costs reduced; remainder of Order affirmed.  Palmieri v. State, CRC0405630CFAES(Fla. 6th Cir. App. Ct. August 11, 2005).

 

 

 

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR PASCO COUNTY

APPELLATE DIVISION

 

 

 

 

EDWARD M. PALMIERI,      

                        Appellant,

                                                                                    CASE NO: 0405630CFAES

 

STATE OF FLORIDA,

                        Appellee.         

_____________________/

 

Appeal from Pasco County Court

Hearing Officer Steve Trabayko, Esq. 

 

Edward M. Palmieri

Pro Se

 

Office of the State Attorney

 

ORDER AND OPINION

 

            Appellant was pulled over and issued a citation for having an obscured license tag in violation of  Florida Statute 316.605(1) .  Appellant was found guilty after a hearing.  Appellant has appealed the judgment raising several issues for this Court to review.  There was no appearance by the State.

            Appellant was driving a vehicle, which by his own admission in his initial brief, had a "marijuana leaf sticker" in the center of the plate.  The appellant was pulled over and the officer issued a citation for having an obscured license tag in violation of  Florida Statute 316.605(1).[1]  Appellant argues that the stop was illegal because the tag was visible and this was admitted in court by the officer.  However, appellant admits that the officer testified although visible, the tag was defaced. He argues that the court  should not have permitted the state to "take a second bite at the apple" in arguing that it was defaced, instead of obscured, as stated on the citation. Appellant further claims that the court  erred when it did not allow a continuance 'when his witness failed to appear', and that the court should have issued a subpoena for the witness to appear. Appellant also argues that he did not own the vehicle, that he did not place the sticker on the vehicle, and that he presented to the court the title, registration and insurance card which was all in the name of a Nancy C. Plymale.   Finally, appellant argues that the court erroneously charged that this was a moving violation, incurring an extra $15.00 charge, while the statute classifies it as a nonmoving violation.

            This Court has reviewed the pleadings and the record and finds that the trial court did error in charging appellant $30.00 for a "moving violation" as indicated on the judgment. Florida Statute 316.605(1) is clearly classified as a nonmoving violation. Thus, appellant's court costs should be reduced to $16.00.  However, with regard to the remaining arguments, appellant has failed to demonstrate in the record any error in the trial court's decision. 

            Accordingly, the appellant's court costs of $30.00 is reduced to $16.00 since it is a non moving violation.  The remainder of the trial court's order is affirmed. 

            DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at New Port Richey, Pasco County, Florida this __ day of  ___________, 2005.

                                                                                    ___________________

                                                                                    W. Lowell Bray, Circuit Judge

                                                                                    Primary Appellate Judge

 

                                                                                                           

                                                                                   

 

                                                                                    __________________

                                                                                    Daniel D. Diskey

                                                                                    Circuit Judge

 

                                                                                    ______________________

                                                                                    Stanley R. Mills

                                                                                    Circuit Judge

Copies to:

Edward M. Palmieri

Office of the State Attorney

Steve Trabayko, Esq.

 



[1] Florida Statute 316.605(1) provides, in pertinent part: Every vehicle, at all times while driven, stopped or parked upon any highways, roads, or streets of this state, shall be licensed in the name of the owner thereof in accordance with the laws of this state. . . and shall . . . display the license plate . . . assigned to it by the state, . . . to be securely fastened to the vehicle outside the main body of the vehicle in such a manner as to prevent the plates from swinging, with all letters, numerals, printing, writing, and other identification marks upon the plates clear and distinct and free from defacement, mutilation, grease, and other obscuring matter, so that they will be plainly visible and legible at all times 100 feet from the rear or front.  Nothing shall be placed upon the face of a Florida plate except as permitted by law or by rule or regulation of a governmental agency. . . .