LARRY MARTIN, 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.
The court held that while convictions are affirmed, the sentences must be corrected regarding jail time credit and retained jurisdiction.
[1] When a defendant receives jail time credit on one sentence that is to run concurrently with another sentence, the credit should also be applied to the concurrent sentence…
[2] A court should retain jurisdiction over one-third of the total consecutive sentences imposed.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant was convicted of attempted second-degree murder and armed robbery, receiving concurrent and consecutive sentences. The trial court applied j…
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 Attempted Second Degree Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant was convicted of two counts of attempted second degree murder with a firearm and two counts of armed robbery. The trial court sentenced defendant to thirty years imprisonment on each attempted murder charge, to be served concurrently, and twenty years imprisonment on each robbery charge, to be served concurrently. The sentences for robbery were to run consecutively to the attempted murder sentences. The court retained jurisdiction over one-half of each sentence imposed. On one of the attempted murder sentences, defendant was given credit for 271 days jail time served. Defendant has three points on appeal, two of which concern sentencing and have merit. We affirm defendant’s conviction but remand for correction of sentences.
First, defendant correctly argues that the court erred under section 921.-161(1), Florida Statutes (1981), by crediting on only one of his sentences the 271 days of jail time served. Generally when a defendant is sentenced on multiple charges, “he is not entitled to have his jail time credit pyramided by being given credit on each sentence for the full time he spends in jail awaiting disposition of multiple charges_” Miller v. State, 297 So. 2d 36, 38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). However, when as here, the defendant received jail time credit on one sentence which was to run concurrently with another sentence, the other sentence should be corrected to apply the credit also to that sentence. See Bevins v. State, 412 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
Second, defendant argues that the court improperly retained jurisdiction. The court should have retained jurisdiction over one-third of the total consecutive sentences. See Adams v. State, 435 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Wicker v. State, 438 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); § 947.16(3), Fla.Stat. (1982). Also, jurisdiction should be retained over only one of the concurrent sentences for attempted murder. See § 947.16(3), Fla.Stat. (1982).
Therefore, we AFFIRM defendant’s convictions but REVERSE and REMAND for correction of sentences consistent with this opinion.
HOBSON, A.C.J., and SCHEB and LE-HAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (30 total)
-
Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1986)…receive concurrent sentences on multiple charges; in such a case the defendant “is not entitled to have his jail time credit pyramided by being given credit on each sentence for the full time he spends in jail awaiting disposition.” Martin v. State, 452 So. 2d 938, 938-39 (quoting Miller v. State, 297 So. 2d 36, 38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)). We reject the state’s argument that Daniels’ trespassing sentence cannot be concurrent with his felony sentences. For the reasons expressed, we approve the district court’s…
-
Darrel Michael Abbott v. State, 478 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…ssues raised alleging errors in sentencing, we find merit in only one issue. We agree with appellant that credit for time served should apply equally to all concurrent sentences. Woolley v. State, 459 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Martin v. State, 452 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), Bevins v. State, 412 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). The record before us reflects that two of appellant’s four concurrent sentences specified 120 days credit for jail time while the other two concurrent sentences authorized seven…
-
Gethers v. State, 798 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ent sentences on multiple charges; in such a case the defendant ‘is not entitled to have his jail time credit pyramided by being given credit on each sentence for the full time he spends in jail awaiting disposition.’ ” Id. (quoting Martin v. State, 452 So. 2d 938, 938-39 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (quoting Miller v. State, 297 So. 2d 36, 38 [*832] (Fla. 1st DCA 1974))) (emphasis in original). Daniels involved a case where a defendant was held in county jail on three felonies and a violation of probation charge aris…
Previewing 3 of 30 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Winston v. State, 297 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
- Miller v. State, 297 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Adams v. State, 435 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Wicker v. State, 438 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Bevins v. State, 412 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)