GARY L. SWYCK, 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.
Swyck appealed the denial of his motion to correct his sentence, claiming he was not properly credited with jail time served between his arrest for probation violation and sentencing. The Second District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that trial courts must address motions seeking jail time credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), and certified a conflict with other district courts on this issue.
The court reversed because the trial court failed to address Swyck's claim that he was not properly credited with twelve days of county jail time. Trial courts must entertain motions seeking jail time credit brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), even though this creates a conflict with decisions from other district courts.
[1] A motion to correct sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) is the proper procedural vehicle to seek relief for a trial court's failure to award…
[2] A trial court must address and refute a defendant's claim that they were not properly credited with jail time served prior to sentencing.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“This court has consistently afforded relief to those complaining that the failure of the trial court to award credit for jail time served rendered their sentences illegal, and was hence subject to correction in a proceeding pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).”
Establishes the Second District's consistent position that jail time credit denials can be remedied through Rule 3.800(a) motions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1981, Swyck was sentenced to prison followed by probation. During his probation period, he violated probation and was re-sentenced to prison. Betwe…
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 Jail Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Gary L. Swyck challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to correct sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. We reverse because the trial court failed to address and refute his claim that he was not properly credited with time spent in jail prior to the imposition of his sentence:
In 1981 Swyck was sentenced to prison to be followed by probation on a separate case. During this later period of supervision, he violated his probation and was again sentenced to prison. He claimed in his motion an entitlement to credit for the earlier time served in prison relying on Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla.1993). As the imposition of his first sentence predated the sentencing guidelines which were effective on October 1, 1983, the dangers in sentencing which Tripp eliminated did not inhere in his circumstances. As the prison sentence in the second case was not factored into any guideline calculation initially, Tripp does not apply. Slater v. State, 639 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). See also Duncan v. State, 686 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
Swyck’s second complaint is that he was not properly credited with twelve days spent in the county jail between his arrest for violation of probation and the sentence which followed. This court has consistently afforded relief to those complaining that the failure of the trial court to award credit for jail time served rendered their sentences illegal, and was hence subject to correction in a proceeding pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). This, however, is not the majority view in this state, and two district courts have certified this question to the Florida Supreme Court for consideration. Berry v. State, 684 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Sullivan v. State, 674 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).1
We acknowledge conflict with the decisions of the First, Fourth, and Fifth District Courts of Appeal which adopt the view that Davis v. State, 661 So. 2d 1193 (Fla.1995), prohibits relief from the denial of jail credit by means of a motion to correct an illegal sentence without regard to the impact that failure may have had in “creating” a sentence which exceeds the statutory maximum 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. In so doing, we certify that this decision is in direct conflict with Berry, Sullivan, and Chaney v. State, 678 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and BLUE, JJ., concur. . The Fifth District is aligned with those courts which have certified the question to the Supreme Court of Florida. Chaney v. State, 678 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). The Third District continues to grant the requested relief as has this court. Gonzalez v. State, 678 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)…el for failing to investigate jail credit and to file a timely motion. This court has consistently held that some jail credit issues may be addressed by a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Street v. State, 693 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); review granted, No. 90,358, 699 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. Sept.5, 1997); Thomas, 611 So. 2d 600. I continue to believe there are some errors involving jail credit that result in illegal sentences which can be resolved without a factual h…
-
Chojnowski v. State, 705 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…el for failing to investigate jail credit and to file a timely motion. This court has consistently held that some jail credit issues may be addressed by a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Street v. State, 693 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); review granted, No. 90,358, 699 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. Sept. 5, 1997); Thomas, 611 So. 2d 600. I continue to believe there are some errors involving jail credit that result in illegal sentences which can be resolved without a factual…
-
Moreland v. State, 700 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…ntence was illegal, and therefore cognizable under rule 3.800(a), only if it exceeded the maximum allowed by law. Accord Brown v. State, 689 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Berry v. State, 684 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). But see Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Gonzalez v. State, 678 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Otherwise, according to Sullivan, a claim for such relief would be appropriate in a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.850. However, such a claim would now be time barred in this…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Davis v. State, 661 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 1995)
- Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1993)
- Sullivan v. State, 674 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Artis Berry v. State, 684 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Quinten Edward Chaney v. State, 678 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Jones v. State, 686 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Arnaldo Tomas Gonzalez v. State, 678 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Duncan v. State, 686 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Slater v. State, 639 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Buford H. McDOWELL v. State, 684 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)