WAYNE NORRIS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Wayne Norris appeals the denial of his postconviction motion seeking credit against his prison sentence for time spent at liberty following his erroneous release from prison. The court affirmed the denial but held that Norris is likely entitled to such credit and should pursue administrative remedies with the Department of Corrections before seeking judicial relief.
Under the present circumstances, Norris appears to be entitled to credit against his sentence for time spent at liberty when prematurely released through no fault of his own. However, it is the Department of Corrections—not the trial court—that has authority to afford such credit, as awarding such credit is an administrative function rather than a judicial one.
[1] A prisoner discharged from prison without fault on their part is entitled to credit against their sentence for the time spent at liberty following a premature release.
[2] The Department of Corrections, not the trial court, is responsible for awarding credit for time spent at liberty due to a premature release.
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 intelligence“the sentence of a prisoner who is discharged without contributing fault continues to run while he is at liberty”
Establishes that prisoners are entitled to credit for time at liberty when erroneously released without their fault
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNorris was erroneously released from prison and spent time at liberty before his release was discovered. He filed a postconviction motion seeking cred…
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 Sentence Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
EDWARDS, J.
Wayne Norris appeals the order denying his postconviction motion, in which he sought additional credit against his prison sentence for the period of time he had been at liberty after being erroneously released from prison. We agree with the postconviction
court’s finding that under the present circumstances, Norris appears to be entitled to credit against his sentence for time spent at liberty when he was prematurely released from prison through no fault of his own. See Drumwright v. State, 572 So. 2d 1029, 1031 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) (holding the sentence of a prisoner who is discharged without contributing fault continues to run while he is at liberty). However, we also agree with the postconviction court that it is up to the Department of Corrections to afford Norris that credit. See State v. Mendiola, 919 So. 2d 471, 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (holding the trial court's order awarding defendant credit for time spent at liberty when he was prematurely released from prison violated separation of powers doctrine). Accordingly, we affirm the postconviction court’s order denying Norris’ postconviction motion without prejudice to Norris to pursue administrative remedies by appropriate application to the DOC. Should Norris not obtain the relief he believes he is entitled to, after exhausting his administrative remedies, he may seek judicial relief. See Bostrom v. State, 732 So. 2d 1228, 1229 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (holding defendant seeking post-sentence credit must exhaust administrative remedies available to him before he seeks relief from the courts). AFFIRMED.
WALLIS, J., concurs. EISNAUGLE, J., concurs specially, with opinion.
EISNAUGLE, J., concurring specially. Case No. 5D19-326
I concur that the trial court did not err because Appellant has not exhausted his administrative remedies. However, I would not reach the merits of Appellant’s entitlement to credit.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Hutchins v. McCLUNG, 572 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
- State v. Mendiola, 919 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- C.A.J. v. State, 732 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Bostrom v. State, 732 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)