LEE WILSON, 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.
Lee Wilson appealed the summary denial of his postconviction relief motion, raising claims regarding resentencing under 1994 guidelines, additional gain time under Heggs v. State, and jail credit for robbery. The court reversed as to two claims (Heggs relief and jail credit) due to inadequate record documentation, and affirmed as to the gain time claim because rule 3.850 was not the proper vehicle.
The court reversed as to the Heggs relief claim and the jail credit claim, requiring the trial court to reconsider these issues with proper record documentation. The court affirmed as to the gain time claim because it must be pursued through administrative remedies and mandamus, not through rule 3.850.
[1] A trial court's summary denial of a motion for postconviction relief must be supported by record attachments when the denial is based on a specific factual finding.
[2] A defendant sentenced as a habitual felony offender may not be entitled to resentencing under the Heggs guidelines.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“The trial court found that Wilson was not entitled to Heggs relief because he was sentenced as a habitual felony offender. The trial court, however, failed to include any record attachments to support this finding.”
Establishes the basis for reversing the Heggs relief denial—lack of documentary support in the record
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilson was convicted and sentenced as a habitual felony offender. He filed a postconviction motion alleging entitlement to resentencing under the 1994…
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 Gain Time cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1105] CASANUEVA, Judge.
Lee Wilson appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Wilson alleges he is entitled to be resentenced under the 1994 guidelines and is entitled to additional gain time pursuant to the supreme court’s decision in Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000), for offenses which he states occurred during the Heggs window period. Wilson also claims that he is entitled to additional jail credit on his conviction for robbery with a weapon. We reverse as to two of these claims.
The trial court found that Wilson was not entitled to Heggs relief because he was sentenced as a habitual felony offender. The trial court, however, failed to include any record attachments to support this finding. We therefore reverse and remand as to this claim. If the trial court again enters an order declaring Heggs re-sentencing unnecessary, it should attach all documents required to reach that conclusion. Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
The trial court failed to address Wilson’s other two claims. As to Wilson’s claim that he is entitled to additional gain time, Wilson must first exhaust administrative remedies through the Department of Corrections. See Clements v. State, 761 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). If Wilson' is not satisfied with the ruling of the Department, he can then file a petition for writ of mandamus with the appropriate circuit court. See Newsome v. Singletary, 637 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Because rule 3.850 was not the proper method by which to raise this claim, we affirm as to it without prejudice to any right Wilson might have to seek the above remedies.
Wilson also alleges that although he spent approximately six months in jail for the robbery charge, he received no credit for time served against the prison sentence imposed in that case. We reverse and remand for the trial court to consider this claim. Should the trial court summarily deny this claim, it must attach record documents conclusively demonstrating that Wilson received all of the jail credit to which he is entitled.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; and remanded.
PARKER, A.C.J., and GREEN and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilson v. State, 801 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…-16274 and 97-6956. Wilson also claims that he is entitled to additional jail time credit as to case number 96-16274. We reverse one of Wilson’s claims. The order of the trial court is affirmed in all other respects. Previously, in Wilson v. State, 783 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (“Wilson I ”)⅞ we reviewed an apparently identical motion from Wilson and an apparently identical order summarily denying relief.. In Wilson I, we reversed and remanded with directions that if the trial court again denied Heggs re…
-
Wesley v. State, 848 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…nd excessive. The circuit court denied his motion, finding that it lacked jurisdiction, because his only avenue of relief lay via a petition for writ of mandamus. The circuit court correctly analyzed its jurisdiction in this matter, Wilson v. State, 783 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), and we thus affirm. We write briefly to explain that even had Mr. Wesley properly filed a petition for mandamus, he is not entitled to the relief he seeks.1 Mr. Wesley was incarcerated serving concurrent sentences, one for a cri…
Authorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Smith v. State, 761 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Hogan v. Ardc Corp., 637 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Clements v. State, 761 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Hickey v. Dunn & Corey, 761 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)