WILLIAM ALBANO, A/K/A THOMAS WILLIAM ALBANO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 1994 Sentencing Guidelines cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
William Albano challenges the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Alba-no’s motion alleged that he was entitled to be resentenced under Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). The trial court denied Albano’s motion, attaching score-sheets which reflect that the sentence Al-bano received could have been imposed under the 1994 sentencing guidelines without a departure.
Heggs is clear that the only defendants entitled to relief are those whose sentences were adversely affected by the 1995 amendments to the sentencing guidelines. Id. at 627. Because Albano’s sentence could have been imposed under the 1994 guidelines without a departure, he was not adversely affected by the amendments. Therefore, we affirm.
PARKER, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blake v. State, 807 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…time spent in jail for the charge which led to that sentence.” Keene v. State, 500 So. 2d 592, 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). If Mr. Blake’s bond was not revoked until May, he would not be entitled to credit against the 1999 cases. Cf. McKnight v. State, 769 So. 2d 434, 434 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (addressing allegation that defendant was entitled to additional jail credit “because he voluntarily canceled his bond on one charge while he was serving jail time on other unbonded charges”). Mr. Blake may be able to obtain…
-
Decoste v. State, 898 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…e to factual matters not ascertainable' from the trial court’s records. As such, our ruling is without prejudice to the defendant’s right to file a rule 3.850 motion. See Blake v. State, 807 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). See also McKnight v. State, 769 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)(noting that where defendant claimed he voluntarily canceled his bond on one charge after being arrested and jailed on another charge, evidentiary hearing would be necessary, so rule 3.800(a) review was not appropriate). AFFIRMED.…
-
Hawks v. State, 885 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…time he spent in jail on the unrelated charge of murder, it was necessary for his bondsman to have “surrendered” him to authorities and have the bond discharged. Whether [*1023] that actually happened here is a factual issue. See McKnight v. State, 769 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (defendant’s claim that he was entitled to additional credit for jail time because he voluntarily cancelled his bond on one charge while he was serving jail time on other unbonded charges required an evidentiary hearing). We conc…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)