ROBERT EUGENE HAMPTON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prison Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges an order denying his claims for postconviction relief. We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s claims that he is entitled to additional jail credit and that his cumulative incarceration exceeds the statutory maximum. However, appellant also claims that his latest sentence exceeds the guidelines recommendation and that he did not receive the proper amount of prison credit. Because the record does not conclusively refute these allegations, we reverse the summary denial of those two claims. On remand, the trial court is directed to evaluate appellant’s prison credit claim in light of Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla.1993), and Staschak v. State, 718 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Should the trial court again deny the appellant’s remaining claims, it must attach portions of the record conclusively demonstrating that the appellant is not entitled to relief. The order denying relief is affirmed in all other respects.
AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED with directions.
BENTON, PADOVANO, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. & Bob Crawford v. City OF Pompano Beach, 792 So. 2d 539 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ding the property owners with an opportunity to appeal this action. However, there was no evidence adduced at trial which supports this assertion.5 Section 120.68 governs judicial review of agency action. Dep’t of Agrie, v. Sun Gardens Citrus, LLP, 780 So. 2d 922, 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). The statute clearly provides that judicial review of both final agency action and nonfinal agency action, if review of the final agency action would not provide an adequate remedy, shall be sought in the district court of ap…1 / 3
-
Markus v. Fla. Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs., 785 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…“apparently healthy but exposed trees in citrus canker emergencies are permissible.” Sapp Farms, Inc. v. Florida Dep’t of Agriculture & Consumer Svcs., 761 So. 2d 347, 348 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); see also Department of Agriculture v. Sun Gardens Citrus, 780 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).1 Therefore, we affirm the IFO as “lawfully entered and ... not ‘defective’.” Sapp Farms, 761 So. 2d at 349. Property owners as well as judicial tribunals are struggling with the issue of how and why the Department of Agriculture…
Authorities Cited
- Tripp v. State, 622 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1993)
- Staschak v. State, 718 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
- Lopez v. State, 718 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)