Due Process Challenge to Section 960.293(2)(B)

In Ilkanic v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 705 So. 2d 1371, 1373 (Fla. 1998), the Court rejected a substantive due process challenge to section 960.293(2)(b): The court concluded that imposing a per diem charge on convicted offenders clearly relates to a permissive legislative objective of reimbursing public bodies for the costs expended in incarcerating these persons. Furthermore, we believe that the flat charge of $ 50 per day is reasonably related to the costs of incarceration. 705 So. 2d at 1372-73. The court found that this reasoning applies equally to section 960.297, the mechanism for imposing the $ 50 per day reimbursement.