JOHN W. TOMLINSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1985-10-16
No. 85-1703
SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.
477 So. 2d 30 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1985) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases


Opinion of the Court
HALL, Judge.

HALL, Judge.

Appellant, John W. Tomlinson, appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reverse.

Appellant's sole allegation is that the trial court failed to give him the correct credit for time served. Appellant alleges that he served two, one-year sentences in the county jail, but he only received credit for four hundred and eighty-six days. Appellant’s allegations, if true, would entitle him to relief under his Rule 3.850 motion.

Appellant is entitled to credit for jail time served from the date of his arrest until the date of sentencing. Zulla v. State, 404 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981).

We remand this case to the trial court to either hold a hearing to determine the correct amount of time served or to deny appellant’s motion and attach those portions of the record which refute appellant’s claim.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Thomas v. State, 863 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
    …s of jail credit she has already received. Thomas also is not entitled to credit for the time she spent in the Hillsborough County jail after her sentencing on May 31, 2002. See Stokes v. State, 851 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Tomlinson v. State, 477 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). In denying her claim for the time spent in the Pinellas County jail, the trial court asserted that Hillsborough County had placed Thomas on a detainer while she was in the Pinellas County jail from March 1, 2002, through May 1,…
  • Chapple v. State, 478 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
    …A defendant sentenced to a period of incarceration is entitled to credit for all time served prior to sentencing. § 921.-161(1), Fla.Stat. (1983). We find that Chap-pie has made a prima facie showing of entitlement to relief.1 Tomlinson v. State, 477 So. 2d 30 (Fla.2d DCA 1985). In denying Chappie’s motion the trial court did not attach sufficient portions of the record to refute Chappie’s allegations, as is required under rule 3.850. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions that the trial cou…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw