Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 939.185 (2025)

Assessment of additional court costs and surcharges.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

939.185 Assessment of additional court costs and surcharges.—

(1)(a) The board of county commissioners may adopt by ordinance an additional court cost, not to exceed $65, to be imposed by the court when a person pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or is found guilty of, or adjudicated delinquent for, any felony, misdemeanor, delinquent act, or criminal traffic offense under the laws of this state. Such additional assessment shall be accounted for separately by the county in which the offense occurred and be used only in the county imposing this cost, to be allocated as follows:

1. Twenty-five percent of the amount collected shall be allocated to fund innovations, as determined by the chief judge of the circuit, to supplement state funding for the elements of the state courts system identified in s. 29.004 and county funding for local requirements under s. 29.008(2)(a)2.

2. Twenty-five percent of the amount collected shall be allocated to assist counties in providing legal aid programs required under s. 29.008(3)(a).

3. Twenty-five percent of the amount collected shall be allocated to fund personnel and legal materials for the public as part of a law library.

4. Twenty-five percent of the amount collected shall be used as determined by the board of county commissioners to support teen court programs, except as provided in s. 938.19(7), juvenile assessment centers, and other juvenile alternative programs.

Each county receiving funds under this section shall report the amount of funds collected pursuant to this section and an itemized list of expenditures for all authorized programs and activities. The report shall be submitted in a format developed by the Supreme Court to the Governor, the Chief Financial Officer, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives on a quarterly basis beginning with the quarter ending September 30, 2004. Quarterly reports shall be submitted no later than 30 days after the end of the quarter. Any unspent funds at the close of the county fiscal year allocated under subparagraphs 2., 3., and 4., shall be transferred for use pursuant to subparagraph 1.

(b) In addition to the court costs imposed under paragraph (a) and any other cost, fine, or penalty imposed by law, any unit of local government which is consolidated as provided by s. 9, Art. VIII of the State Constitution of 1885, as preserved by s. 6(e), Art. VIII of the State Constitution, and which is granted the authority in the State Constitution to exercise all the powers of a municipal corporation, and any unit of local government operating under a home rule charter adopted pursuant to ss. 10, 11, and 24, Art. VIII of the State Constitution of 1885, as preserved by s. 6(e), Art. VIII of the State Constitution, which is granted the authority in the State Constitution to exercise all the powers conferred now or hereafter by general law upon municipalities, may impose by ordinance a surcharge in the amount of $85 to be imposed by the court when a person pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or is found guilty of, or adjudicated delinquent for, any felony, misdemeanor, delinquent act, or criminal traffic offense under the laws of this state. Revenue from the surcharge shall be transferred to such unit of local government for the purpose of replacing fine revenue deposited into the clerk’s fine and forfeiture fund under s. 142.01. Proceeds from the imposition of the surcharge authorized in this paragraph shall not be used for the purpose of securing payment of the principal and interest on bonds.

(c) The disbursement of costs collected under this section shall be subordinate in priority order of disbursement to all other state-imposed costs authorized in this chapter, restitution or other compensation to victims, and child support payments.

(d) The clerk of court shall cause a certified copy of the court order imposing such costs to be recorded in the public records. Such record constitutes a lien against the person upon whom the costs are imposed and shall attach as a lien on any real property owned by such person located in the county in which such order is recorded in the same manner and to the same extent as a judgment recorded as provided in s. 55.10. Such order shall attach as a lien on any personal property owned by such person located in the state upon the filing with the Department of State of a judgment lien certificate regarding such order as provided in ss. 55.202-55.209. A lien created under this paragraph does not attach to, or make subject to execution of levy or foreclosure, any real or personal property otherwise exempt under s. 4, Art. X of the State Constitution. A lien created under this paragraph is enforceable in the same manner as provided by law.

(2) The court shall order a person to pay the additional court cost. If the person is determined to be indigent, the clerk shall defer payment of this cost.

History.—s. 88, ch. 2004-265; ss. 63, 72, ch. 2005-236; s. 3, ch. 2007-71; s. 14, ch. 2009-61; s. 10, ch. 2009-215; s. 35, ch. 2010-162.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 66 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case: Griffin v. State, 980 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Griffin v. State, 980 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 2008). · cites it 9× “185 when that statute was enacted after the date Griffin is alleged to have committed a criminal act. In Ridgeway the First District Court of Appeal was faced with the identical issue.”

Ridgeway v. State, 892 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). · cites it 8× “Appellant challenges the trial court's retroactive application of the cost provisions of section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2004), arguing it violates federal and State Constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws.”

Jamin Chavis v. State of Florida, 247 So. 3d 9 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). · cites it 5× “In his second issue, the defendant argues the court erred in imposing costs without referencing the applicable county ordinance supporting the imposition of a assessment, pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2016).”

Griffin v. State, 946 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). · cites it 5× “Griffin was sentenced in November 2004, the costs the court imposed included, among other items, a cost pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2004), and costs of and 0 pursuant to section 938.”

T.L.S. v. State, 949 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). · cites it 6× “also contends that the trial court erred in imposing the cost pursuant to section 939.185, which provides in pertinent part: (l)(a) The board of county commissioners may adopt by ordinance an addition *293 al court cost, not to exceed , to be imposed by the court when a…”

R.F. v. State, 42 So. 3d 333 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). · cites it 8× “With respect to costs under section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2007), R.”

Ogden v. State, 117 So. 3d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). · cites it 3× “800(b)(2), arguing that the court erred in imposing certain costs without orally pronouncing them: a cost under section 939.185(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), in both cases; a 0 cost under section 938.”

Waller v. State, 911 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). · cites it 2× “Section 939.185 appears to have replaced this section.”

Cutwright v. State, 934 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). · cites it 3× “085, Florida Statutes (2004), and a cost pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2004).”

Carter v. State, 173 So. 3d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). · cites it 2× “Next, the trial court imposed a cost pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes, but failed to cite the applicable ordinance.”

Clark v. State, 963 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). · cites it 4× “085, Florida Statutes (creating a surcharge to fund rape crisis centers), [1] and a court cost of imposed under section 939.185, Florida Statutes (creating an "additional court cost" assessable by the board of county commissioners).”

Gonzalez v. State, 939 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). · cites it 3× “083(2), Florida Statutes (2004), and section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2004), respectively.”

Show all 66 citing cases →

— 939.185(1) — 1 case

Marsh v. State, 965 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

— 939.185(1)(a) — 21 cases

Jamin Chavis v. State of Florida, 247 So. 3d 9 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). “In his second issue, the defendant argues the court erred in imposing costs without referencing the applicable county ordinance supporting the imposition of a assessment, pursuant to section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2016).”

Watts v. State, 973 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).

R.F. v. State, 42 So. 3d 333 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). “With respect to costs under section 939.185, Florida Statutes (2007), R.”

H.S. v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).

Mitchell v. State, 954 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

— 939.185(2) — 1 case

Christopher J. Porter v. State of Florida (Fla. 4th DCA 2026).

— 939.185(l)(a) — 7 cases

Ogden v. State, 117 So. 3d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). “800(b)(2), arguing that the court erred in imposing certain costs without orally pronouncing them: a cost under section 939.185(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), in both cases; a 0 cost under section 938.”

T.L.S. v. State, 949 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). “also contends that the trial court erred in imposing the cost pursuant to section 939.185, which provides in pertinent part: (l)(a) The board of county commissioners may adopt by ordinance an addition *293 al court cost, not to exceed , to be imposed by the court when a…”

J.W.J. v. State, 994 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).

De la Fuente v. State, 58 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011).

S.F. v. State, 56 So. 3d 116 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.