MICHAEL WILDER, 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.
Michael Wilder appeals the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, claiming he was not credited for 74 days spent in Hernando County Jail before transfer to Pinellas County. The appellate court reversed, holding that Wilder need not prove the jail time was attributable solely to the Pinellas County charge and remanded for the trial court to examine jail records and determine his entitlement to additional credit.
A defendant need not prove that time spent in a jail in another county was attributable solely to the charge in the sentencing county. If the defendant was held in the other county's jail after an arrest warrant for the sentencing county's charge was served, the defendant is entitled to credit for that time if the sentences in both cases were made to run concurrently.
[1] A claim for jail credit is cognizable in a motion to correct an illegal sentence when the court records affirmatively demonstrate an entitlement to relief.
[2] A defendant is not required to prove that jail time was attributable solely to the charge in the sentencing county to receive credit for that time.
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“credit time issues are cognizable in a rule 3.800 motion when it is affirmatively alleged that the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief”
Establishes that Wilder's claim about jail credit can be brought as a rule 3.800(a) motion
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilder was arrested and held in Hernando County Jail. He was subsequently transferred to Pinellas County, where he was convicted and sentenced. At sen…
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
PER CURIAM.
Michael Wilder appeals the summary denial of his amended motion to correct an illegal sentence, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Wilder asserts that his sentence is illegal because he did not receive credit for time spent in the Hernando County Jail prior to being transferred to Pinellas County, where he was convicted and sentenced in this case. Wilder contends that the trial court should have awarded him seventy-four days of jail credit, instead of only twenty-five days. He asserts that this error is apparent from the face of the record.
Wilder’s claim is cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998) (holding “credit time issues are cognizable in a rule 3.800 motion when it is affirmatively alleged that the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief’). The trial court denied relief because Wilder failed to prove that the time he spent in the Hernando County Jail was attributable “solely” to the Pinellas County charge in this case. We reverse.
Wilder does not have to prove that the time spent in the Hernando County Jail was attributable “solely” to the Pinel-las County charge before he can be awarded credit for that time. If Wilder was being held in the Hernando County Jail after an arrest warrant for the Pinellas County charge was served on him, he would be entitled to credit for túne served in the Hernando County Jail in this case, if the sentences in the Hernando County cases and in this case were made to run concurrently. See Bank v. State, 632 So. 2d 640, 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (holding that “unless concurrent sentences are involved, a defendant held on multiple charges arising from different jurisdictions is not entitled to overlapping credit”); Travis v. State, 724 So. 2d 119, 120 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that “from the time a warrant is transmitted or issued to another county and that county incarcerates the defendant on unrelated charges, that defendant ... is deemed to be in custody on the warrants from both counties and therefore entitled to jail credit on concurrent sentencing”).
Given the limited record before us, we cannot tell whether Wilder is entitled to additional jail credit. We do not know the date on which Wilder was served with the Pinellas County arrest warrant; nor do we know if the sentences in his Pinellas County case and in his Hernando County cases were made to run concurrently.
Because the trial court’s order fails to refute Wilder’s claim, we must reverse. Upon remand, the trial court should consult Wilder’s court file and his jail records in determining whether he is entitled to additional jail credit. See Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984, 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (holding trial court should examine court file and, if necessary, jail card to determine whether defendant is entitled to additional credit for time served). If the trial court again summarily _ denies the amended motion, it must attach those portions of the record which conclusively demonstrate that Wilder is not entitled to relief.
Reversed and remanded.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SALCINES and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bryant v. State, 787 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…different opinions between districts as to when a defendant is entitled to jail credit; declining to reach matter because not addressed by the parties). This court has not previously taken a firm position on the matter. See, e.g., Wilder v. State, 753 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (holding defendant entitled to jail credit for time served in Hernando County if held on a Pinellas County arrest warrant while in Hernando County jail); Medina v. State, 779 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (holding defendant entitl…
-
Nelson v. State, 760 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…hat the trial court should examine not only the' court file, but if necessary, the jail record to determine whether the defendant is entitled to additional credit for time served, Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Wilder v. State, 753 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000), because appellant’s jail records may establish his entitlement to relief.. We, therefore, affirm the order below without prejudice to appellant’s right to refile a rule 3.800(a) motion affirmatively stating where in the court f…
-
Berkeley Thompson v. State, 772 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…that order any documents concermng Appellant’s incarceration in Duval County. Therefore, we must reverse on this issue and remand to allow further examination of the record. Nelson v. State, 760 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). See Wilder v. State, 753 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (on remand the trial court should consult defendant’s court file and jail records to determine whether he is entitled to additional jail credit). Appellant also claims he was wrongly assessed 80 victim injury points because his…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Travis v. State, 724 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Eric D. Bank v. State, 632 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)