TYRONE WILKINS, 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.
Tyrone Wilkins appealed the revocation of his community control and imposition of sentence, claiming the written sentencing order differed from the oral pronouncement regarding jail time credits. The court affirmed the sentence, finding Wilkins failed to provide a complete record demonstrating the alleged discrepancy and allowing him to raise the issue through a motion in the trial court.
The court affirmed the sentence, holding that Wilkins failed to meet his burden of providing a complete appellate record to allow meaningful review of the alleged sentencing error regarding jail time credits. The court noted that no specific number of jail credit days was mentioned at the sentencing hearing, making it impossible to determine the exact entitlement from the record.
[1] In the event of a conflict between an orally pronounced sentence and a written sentencing order, the orally pronounced sentence prevails.
[2] An appellate court will affirm a judgment and sentence when the appellant fails to provide a complete appellate record sufficient for meaningful review of an alleged sent…
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 orally pronounced sentence would prevail”
Establishes the legal principle that oral sentences control over written sentences in case of conflict
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilkins' community control was revoked and he was resentenced. The written sentencing order granted 114 days of credit for time incarcerated before im…
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 Credit For Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
MICKLE, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order revoking community control and imposing judgment and sentence. The appellant contends that the written sentencing order differs from the sentence orally pronounced as to the appellant’s entitlement to certain credits for time served in jail and in prison. Were this true, the orally pronounced sentence would prevail. See Kyle v. State, 648 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Timmons v. State, 453 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (oral sentence controls over written sentence in case of conflict). However, our review of the written sentencing order shows that credits were given. The following categories were checked off:
It is further ordered that the defendant shall be allowed a total of Ilk days as credit for time incarcerated before imposition of this sentence.
It is further ordered that the defendant be allowed credit for all time previously served on this count in the Department of Corrections prior to resentencing.
(Emphasis in original). Inasmuch as the appellant acknowledges that the trial court orally pronounced the correct amount of credit for prison time served, and DOC credit time is acknowledged in the order, this leaves only the matter of the 114 days’ credit. The appellant claims entitlement to 185 days’ credit. We cannot determine from the appellate record the exact number of days’ credit to which the appellant is entitled for time spent in jail, nor was any specific number of days mentioned at the sentencing hearing. We conclude that the appellant has not met his burden to provide a complete record to allow meaningful appellate review of this alleged sentencing error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and sentence, without prejudice to the appellant to file a proper Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion in the lower tribunal addressing the sentencing question.
AFFIRMED.
MINER and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hires v. State, 688 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…st DCA 1996). To the extent that he contends he is entitled to additional jail time, he has not carried the burden of showing error because the record before us does not establish the amount of time the appellant spent in jail. See Wilkins v. State, 673 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). The appellant still has the option of pursuing this matter under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See id. Although the state concedes that the appellant is entitled to “some” credit for time spent on supervised release…
Authorities Cited
- Timmons v. State, 453 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Monilethan A. Kyle v. State, 648 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)