EUGENE POOLE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Clarification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final order of the Broward County Circuit Court which summarily denied a motion for clarification of sentence. This court has treated the motion as if filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Appellant has claimed that his three sentences are illegal due to the denial of equal jail-time credit on them. The trial court summarily denied his motion without attaching any portions of the trial court record.
Since the motion was legally sufficient, Fountain v. State, 660 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the trial court erred in summarily denying it without attachments of portions of the record. McCray v. State, 633 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Haggerty v. State, 632 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
We therefore reverse and remand for attachment of portions of the record.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
GUNTHER, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Phillips v. State, 998 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…it 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, Phillip…
Authorities Cited
- Fountain v. State, 660 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Eldridge A. McCRAY v. State, 633 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Haggerty v. State, 632 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)