IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF
APPELLATE DIVISION
EDWARD M. PALMIERI,
Appellant,
CASE
NO: 0405630CFAES
STATE OF
Appellee.
_____________________/
Appeal from
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,
___________________
Primary
Appellate Judge
__________________
Daniel
D. Diskey
Circuit
Judge
______________________
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