WILLIAM J. SULLO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
WILLIAM J. SULLO, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
663 So. 2d 11
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1995)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of an order summarily denying his rule 3.800(a) motion. Following Fountain v. State, 660 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings. If the record can answer the question of whether appellant is entitled to jail time credit, the rule 3.800(a) motion is appropriate for seeking relief. If that fact cannot be determined from the record, the rule 3.800(a) motion should be denied.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DELL, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ford v. State, 667 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…f on the same grounds, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Haggerty. At the present time there is no provision for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to rule 3.800. See State v. Callaway, 658 So. 2d 983 (Fla.1995); Sullo v. State, 663 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Fountain. Therefore, if the record offers no indication as to the correctness of the credit for time served, the validity of defendant’s contentions could only be determined after an evi-dentiary hearing following a 3.850 motion…
-
Repetti v. State, 741 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…in county jail for the uncharged count of failing to appear. As the state correctly concedes, because Repetti was not formally charged with the crime of failure to appear, it was error for the lower court to convict him of same. See Perry v. State, 663 So. 2d 11, 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Accordingly, we reverse his conviction on this charge. As to the other points raised in this appeal, we affirm as unpersuasive. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part. POLEN, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.…
-
Vanderblomen v. State, 709 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…tions, nonetheless held that the decision in Callaway necessarily limited such claims only to those that could be determined without an eviden-tiary hearing. See Fountain v. State, 660 So. 2d 376, 377-78 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); see also Sullo v. State, 663 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Saunders v. State, 661 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). That court later held that the decision in Davis necessarily meant that a claim for additional presentencing jail or prison credit could not be raised in a 3.800(a) motion u…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fountain v. State, 660 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)