Full Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT MATTHEW A. PIERCE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 2D21-1459 November 30, 2022 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Charlotte County; Scott H. Cupp, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Rachel Paige Roebuck, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Katherine Coombs Cline, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Matthew A. Pierce appeals his judgment and sentence for trafficking in methamphetamine and possession of a controlled substance. Mr. Pierce was sentenced on both counts to thirteen years' imprisonment with a three-year mandatory minimum. The trial court's oral pronouncement at sentencing reflects that Mr. Pierce's sentence should have been thirteen years' imprisonment on the trafficking charge and five years' imprisonment on the possession charge, to run concurrent with the thirteen-year sentence on the trafficking charge. The State concedes error on this point, and we agree. See Enchautegui v. State, 749 So. 2d 550, 550 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) ("An oral pronouncement will most certainly prevail when the State concedes that the written sentence is in error."); see also State v. Akins, 69 So. 3d 261, 269 (Fla. 2011) ("[W]hen there is a discrepancy between the written sentence and 'the oral pronouncement, the oral pronouncement prevails.' " (quoting Justice v. State, 674 So. 2d 123, 125 (Fla. 1996))). Accordingly, we reverse Mr. Pierce's sentence and remand for a corrected sentence in accordance with the trial court's oral pronouncement at sentencing. Mr. Pierce also identifies that the trial court assessed a $65 "Court Facility & Legal Aid, etc. Fund" fee pursuant to local ordinance 2004-036 and failed to cite the appropriate Florida 2 statute. As we have previously instructed trial courts in this district, cost orders should reference both the applicable local ordinance and Florida statute, and we note the same here. See Reyes v. State, 655 So. 2d 111, 121–22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), superseded by statute, § 938.15, Fla. Stat. (1997), on other grounds as recognized in Waller v. State, 911 So. 2d 226, 227 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). We find no merit in any of the other issues raised by Mr. Pierce in this appeal. Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded for corrected sentence. NORTHCUTT, BLACK, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication. 3