DAVID W. CLINESMITH, 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.
The court reversed the trial court's summary denial of Clinesmith's motion for additional jail credit because the record did not support the finding that he was incarcerated for only seventy-eight days, and remanded for reconsideration of the relevant court and jail records.
A trial court's summary denial of a motion for jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) must be supported by record evidence, and if the record does not conclusively demonstrate the duration of incarceration, the court must either grant relief or deny without prejudice to allow an evidentiary hearing.
[1] Jail records may be considered in determining jail credit issues raised pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), and a summary denial must be supported by…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClinesmith claimed he was incarcerated from October 13, 1998, until his sentencing on May 25, 1999, but received jail credit for only seventy-eight da…
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 Motion For Additional Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
David W. Clinesmith appeals the summary denial of his motion for additional jail credit brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) Cli-nesmith alleged that the court and jail records show on their face that he was incarcerated from October 13, 1998, until his sentencing on May 25, 1999, yet he only received jail credit for seventy-eight days. The trial court denied the motion, finding the court records showed that Cli-nesmith was only incarcerated from April 14, 1999, until May 25, 1999. The records attached by the trial court do not, however, support this conclusion. We, therefore, reverse and remand. See McPherson v. State, 750 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
On remand, the trial court shall consider the relevant court and jail records in order to determine whether Clinesmith is entitled to relief. See Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (holding that jail records can properly be considered in determining jail credit issues raised pursuant to rule 3.800(a)). If the trial court again finds that Clinesmith was only in jail for seventy-eight days, it shall attach those portions of the record which conclusively demonstrate this. If, on the other hand, the court concludes that the motion cannot be decided on the face of the record but requires an evidentiary hearing, it may deny the motion but that denial shall be without prejudice to Clinesmith filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Young v. State, 754 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Reversed and remanded.
PARKER, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA and GREEN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ford v. State, 801 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…ases. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court should again deny Ford’s claims, it must attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute his claims. See Clinesmith v. State, 775 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- McPHERSON v. State, 750 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Young v. State, 754 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)