Narrative Opinion Summary
Darryl Williams appeals his judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine with intent to sell. The court affirms the judgment and sentence but identifies an issue with the attorney’s fee lien of $3,180, which was imposed without notice or an opportunity for Williams to be heard. Citing Davis v. State, the court confirms that this error was preserved in the trial court as per Bain v. State. Consequently, the court strikes the fee lien but allows the trial court to potentially reimpose it after proper notice and a hearing. The decision results in a partial affirmation, striking of the lien, and a remand for further proceedings.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Judgment and Sentencesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirms the judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine with intent to sell, indicating that the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Reasoning: The court affirms the judgment and sentence but identifies an issue with the attorney’s fee lien of $3,180, which was imposed without notice or an opportunity for Williams to be heard.
Due Process in Imposing Attorney's Fee Liensubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court strikes the attorney's fee lien due to the lack of notice and opportunity to be heard, highlighting the requirement of procedural due process before imposing such a lien.
Reasoning: The court affirms the judgment and sentence but identifies an issue with the attorney’s fee lien of $3,180, which was imposed without notice or an opportunity for Williams to be heard.
Preservation of Errorsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The error regarding the fee lien was preserved in the trial court, following the precedent set by Davis v. State and Bain v. State, allowing the appellate court to address it.
Reasoning: Citing Davis v. State, the court confirms that this error was preserved in the trial court as per Bain v. State.
Remand for Reimposition of Fee Liensubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court permits the trial court to potentially reimpose the attorney's fee lien, provided proper notice and a hearing are conducted, ensuring compliance with due process.
Reasoning: Consequently, the court strikes the fee lien but allows the trial court to potentially reimpose it after proper notice and a hearing.