MICHAEL BARNISHIN, 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.
Appellant's motion for jail credit should be treated as a petition for mandamus rather than denied outright; the trial court must determine whether administrative remedies were exhausted before ruling on the merits.
A trial court may treat an improperly labeled postconviction motion for jail credit as a petition for mandamus and grant relief if the DOC award does not conform to the sentencing order and administrative remedies are exhausted.
[1] A trial court may treat an improperly captioned postconviction motion for jail credit as a petition for mandamus and address the merits if the defendant has exhausted adm…
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 intelligenceAppellant sought additional jail credit from the Department of Corrections, asserting the sentencing court had awarded it, by filing a motion labeled …
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 Sentencing Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In a motion labeled a motion for clarification of sentence, the appellant sought additional jail credit from the Department of Corrections asserting that such credit had been awarded by the sentencing court. The court below denied the motion without reaching the merits. The court determined that a postconviction motion is an improper avenue for the relief sought and that the proper avenue to correct such an error is a petition for a writ of mandamus directed at the Department of Corrections which is filed after the petitioner has exhausted his administrative remedies.
While the trial court is correct that the appellant should have raised the jail credit claim in a petition for a writ of mandamus rather than by motion, See Grimes v. State, 657 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), a trial court may treat a motion as a petition for a writ of mandamus and grant mandamus relief if it determines that the award of credit by the DOC does not conform to the sentencing order and the defendant has exhausted his administrative remedies. See id.; Ashley v. Moore, 746 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Therefore, we reverse the denial of appellant’s postconviction motion and remand for the court to treat the motion as a petition for a writ of mandamus. At that time, the court should determine whether the appellant has exhausted all available administrative remedies. See Plymel v. Moore, 770 So. 2d 242, 246-247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MINER, WOLF and WEBSTER, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Simmons v. State, 74 So. 3d 148 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…PER CURIAM. DISMISSED. This dismissal is without prejudice to the appellant’s right to seek any other relief to which he may be entitled. Brigham v. State, 769 So. 2d 1100, [*149] 1101 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Barnishin v. State, 795 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, and ROWE, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Hillsborough Cnty. v. Deason, 770 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Grimes v. State, 657 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Turner v. Turner, 746 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)