WESLEY PHILLIPS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Wesley Phillips appeals the denial of his motion for clarification of sentence seeking additional jail credit. The trial court determined Phillips had been awarded 459 days of credit, which exceeded his entitlement. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that Phillips failed to show the trial court awarded improper credit and directing him to seek administrative remedies if the Department of Corrections is not honoring the court's award.
The court affirmed the trial court's order denying the motion, holding that Phillips failed to allege or show that the trial court awarded improper credit. If the Department of Corrections has refused to follow the sentencing order, Phillips must first exhaust administrative remedies and then seek a writ of mandamus from the appropriate circuit court.
“Because he is raising an issue related to the credit for time served, we treat the motion for clarification of sentence as a rule 3.800(a) motion.”
Establishes the court's basis for addressing Phillips's appeal despite the procedural posture
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePhillips received a sentence and was initially credited with jail time. The trial court determined Phillips had been awarded 459 days of jail credit, …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.800(A) Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Wesley Phillips appeals the denial of a motion for clarification of sentence which he filed after the trial court denied a rule 3.800(a) motion. In his 3.800 motion, Phillips sought additional jail credit. The trial court denied the 3.800 motion based upon the state’s response which indicated that Phillips was awarded 459 days jail credit, which was more time than he was entitled to receive. In his motion for clarification of sentence, Phillips asked the trial court to issue an order stating that he was awarded 459 days credit because the Department of Corrections has given him credit for only 196 days.
Because he is raising an issue related to the credit for time served, we treat the motion for clarification of sentence as a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Poole v. State, 666 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). We affirm the circuit court’s order because Phillips has not alleged or shown that the trial court failed to award the proper credit.
If the Department has refused to follow a sentencing order awarding him this credit, Phillips must first exhaust his administrative remedies and then file a petition for writ of mandamus in the Second Judicial Circuit in Leon County. See Bush v. State, 945 So. 2d 1207 (Fla.2006); Cunningham v. State, 968 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Pugh v. State, 954 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
FARMER, KLEIN and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Latarsa White v. State, 60 So. 3d 1101 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…egarding the prison credit, the Department of Corrections (“DOC”) is responsible for awarding this type of credit. Ms. White must first exhaust her administrative remedies with DOC in order to pursue an award of prison credit. See Phillips v. State, 998 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Finally, Ms. White raises an issue that was not contained in her rule 3.800(a) motion. Specifically, she argues that her thirty-year VOP sentence for strong-arm robbery is illegal because she was never sentenced to probation wi…
Authorities Cited
- Corbblin Bush v. State, 945 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 2006)
- Cunningham v. State, 968 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Dieudonne v. State, 954 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Pugh v. State, 954 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Poole v. State, 666 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)