BUFORD H. MCDOWELL, 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.
The trial court's summary denial of a motion to correct sentence must be reversed if it lacks attachments supporting the denial.
Appellant moved to correct his sentence, alleging he did not receive proper jail time credit. The State responded, arguing the credit was correct, but…
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 Summary Denial cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Buford H. McDowell appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct sentence. His motion alleges that he did not receive jail time credit which he was entitled to receive. We reverse because the trial court’s order lacks attachments supporting the denial.
The trial court directed the state attorney to respond to McDowell’s motion. In its response, the state argued that McDowell was credited with the correct number of days in jail; however, the state faded to provide attachments to support its position. The trial court concluded that McDowell received the proper jail credit, but the trial court also failed to attach to its order documentation supporting its conclusion.
We are compelled to reverse the order denying McDowell’s motion because the order lacks attachments. If the trial court again concludes that summary denial is proper, it must attach to its order those portions of the case file and record which demonstrate that McDowell is not entitled to relief. Otherwise, the court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the merits of his case. See Surratt v. State, 659 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Reversed.
DANABY, A.C.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…imum allowable sanction. In so doing we confirm the decisions of this court which have required trial courts to entertain motions seeking jail time credit brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). See, e.g., McDowell v. State, 684 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). We reverse the order denying the motion because it fails to refute Swyck’s assertion that the trial court neglected to ayvard him twelve days’ county jail credit prior to the imposition of the sentence he is currently serving. I…
Authorities Cited
- Snyder v. Linville, 659 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)