State v. Bilton

It is well settled that a trial court errors when imposing a DUII fee without first announcing it at sentencing.

Defendant was fined $255 for the “Intoxicant Conviction Fee” as a result of a Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII) conviction. Defendant assigned error to the lower court’s imposition of the Intoxicant Conviction Fee. Defendant argued that the fee should be reversed because the court did not announce it at sentencing and, therefore, Defendant was not required to preserve his claim of error. The State responded by claiming that the issue could have been raised when the court ordered assessment of fees in Defendant’s presence. It is well settled that a trial court errs when imposing a DUII fee without first announcing it at sentencing. Before going off the record, the court made a reference to “that assessment” while speaking to a court clerk, and the State argues that that was a reference to the Intoxicant Conviction Fee. The Court held that because the fee was not announced in open court, Defendant was not required to preserve the error. Intoxicant Conviction Fee VACATED; REMANDED for resentencing; otherwise AFFIRMED.