5D09-2194 Roger Mansfield v. State

State: Florida

Court: Florida Fifth District Court

Docket No: 5D09-2194

Case Date: 08/24/2009

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2009

ROGER MANSFIELD, Petitioner, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ________________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2009 Petition for Certiorari Review of Order from the Circuit Court for Brevard County, Robert T. Burger, Judge. Mary M. Kramer and Douglas R. Beam, of Douglas R. Beam, P.A., Melbourne, for Petitioner. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pamela J. Koller, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. Case No. 5D09-2194

PER CURIAM. Roger Mansfield seeks certiorari review of the trial court's amended order denying his second amended motion to determine partial indigency for purposes of costs.1 We grant Mansfield's petition and quash the lower court's order.

By prior order, this Court partially denied Mansfield's petition to the extent that he sought to quash the trial court's order denying his motion to exclude the victim advocate from appearing at the victim's deposition.

1

Mansfield was arrested and charged with three counts of sexual battery and three counts of lewd and lascivious molestation. After three and a half months in jail, he posted a $135,000 surety bond and was released. Mansfield and members of his family contributed to pay the $13,500 bond premium. Mansfield also retained private counsel for a fee of $25,000, plus costs. After extensive discovery, Mansfield claimed to have exhausted his financial resources and asserted that he was unable to afford the costs associated with the completion of several depositions. indigent for the purposes of costs. Mansfield asked the trial court to declare him In denying Mansfield's motion, the trial court

concluded that "it [was] not reasonable for [Mansfield] to expend substantial financial resources on bond and a retainer and then plead poverty for court costs." There is no doubt that Mansfield's ability to post a substantial bond and enter into a retainer agreement with private counsel are two of the relevant factors that the trial court is expressly directed to consider in determining indigency for costs. See

Download 5D09-2194 Roger Mansfield v. State.pdf