AARON MIZZELL, 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.
A trial court's order denying a motion for jail credit must be supported by documentation from the case file or record.
Aaron Mizzell appealed the summary denial of his motion for jail credit. The trial court denied the motion without attaching any documentation to supp…
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.
Aaron Mizzell appeals the summary denial of his motion for jail credit.1 In its order, the trial court disclosed that it had reviewed its files and had been advised by the Manatee County Sheriffs Office that that office had assessed the merits of Mizzell’s motion. The trial court concluded that Mizzell had been granted all the relief to which he was entitled. The trial court, however, failed to attach any documentation to the order in support of its ruling. Consequently, the order cannot be upheld. See Street v. State, 693 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).
Accordingly, the order denying Mizzell’s motion for jail credit is reversed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings. On remand, if the court again concludes that summary denial is proper, it must attach to its order those portions of the case file and record which refute Mizzell’s claim.
Reversed and remanded.
FRANK, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur. . This court acknowledges conflict with the decisions of the First, Fourth, and Fifth District Courts of Appeal and follows its prior decisions requiring trial courts to entertain motions seeking jail credit brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). See Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vanderblomen v. State, 709 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…um for the particular offense, and acknowledged conflict on this point with this court, and the fourth and fifth districts. See Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618, 619 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 699 So. 2d 1376 (Fla.1997); see also Mizzell v. State, 702 So. 2d 606, 606 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)(noting conflict with this court, and the fourth and fifth districts on this issue); Farrior v. State, 702 So. 2d 567, 567 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)(citing Swyck and reaffirming that “[w]e have consistently held that rule 3.800…
Authorities Cited
- Swyck v. State, 693 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Street v. State, 693 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)