TIMOTHY BRAZELL, 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 defendant is entitled to review of new issues raised in a successive motion for jail credit, even if the motion is otherwise successive.
Timothy Brazell appealed the denial of his motion for additional jail credit, which the trial court denied as successive. Brazell had previously filed…
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 Successive Motions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Timothy Brazell appeals the denial of his motion seeking additional jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand because the trial court erred in denying Brazell’s motion as successive.
Although Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) does not prohibit the filing of successive motions, a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided. See Price v. State, 692 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). The trial court denied Brazell’s motion as successive because Brazell had previously filed a motion requesting additional credit for time he spent in a drug treatment program.
However, Brazell raises an additional issue in his current rule 3.800(a) motion, which the trial court failed to address. Brazell asserts that he is entitled to credit for time he spent in jail waiting for a bed space to become available at the drug treatment program. This specific issue was not previously decided. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. On remand, the trial court shall determine whether the court records demonstrate that Brazell was actually incarcerated in the county jail while awaiting a bed space in the drug program, and if he is entitled to additional credit for this time period. The trial court may consider and examine the jail records in making this determination. See Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
Reversed and remanded.
BLUE, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA and STRINGER, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Burgess v. Crosby, 870 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…ere is no similar time limit in the rules of appellate procedure to challenge other Department orders on gain time, nor orders of the Florida Parole Commission in parole revocation or presumptive parole release date proceedings. . Brazell v. State, 770 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Riddle v. State, 686 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Fulton v. State, 659 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).…
-
Scott v. State, 805 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…1991). That is not, however, the case, here because Scott was not awaiting transportation to prison. Scott was being held pending placement in a drug treatment facility. Credit for this time is properly awarded by the trial court. Brazell v. State, 770 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Riddle v. State, 686 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Fulton v. State, 659 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). If, as Scott alleges, the Par hold limited his ability to be released from custody, then he may be entitled to credit for the…
-
Johnson v. State, 783 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…Zeigler v. State, 632 So. 2d 48 (Fla.1993). However, rule 3.800(a) does not prohibit the filing of successive motions, although “a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided.” Brazell v. State, 770 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings on this claim. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. PARKER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and SALCINES, JJ., concur. . Johnson titled th…
Authorities Cited
- Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Price v. State, 692 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Wilson v. State, 692 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)