TERRY WEAVER, 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.
Terry Weaver appealed his conviction and sentence for a substantive offense committed while on parole, challenging the trial court's denial of jail time credit for 374 days served prior to sentencing. The court affirmed the conviction but remanded for the trial court to determine whether the pre-sentence jail time had been credited to his prior parole violation sentence, and if not, to apply it to the instant sentence.
Although a defendant is not entitled to multiple credit for the same time served on multiple charges, a defendant is entitled to jail time credit if he has not already received it otherwise. The conviction was affirmed, but the case was remanded for the trial court to determine whether the 374 days of pre-sentence jail time had already been credited to the parole violation sentence, and if not, to apply that credit to the instant sentence.
[1] A defendant is entitled to jail time credit for the period of time held on the charge that prompted the revocation of probation or parole.
[2] A defendant is not entitled to duplicate credit for jail time served if that time has already been credited to another sentence.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Although Weaver is not entitled to multiple credit, he is entitled to this credit if he has not already received it otherwise.”
Establishes the governing principle that while multiple crediting is prohibited, defendants may receive jail time credit if it has not been credited to another sentence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWeaver was convicted of a new substantive offense committed while on parole. The trial court imposed a 15-year sentence consecutive to his parole sent…
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 Parole Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Terry Weaver, raises two points in this appeal from a judgment and sentence imposed for a new substantive offense committed while Weaver was on parole. We affirm the first point without discussion.
In the second point, Weaver argues that the trial court should have given him credit for the 374 days he served in jail prior to sentencing. The court denied this credit because it imposed a 15-year sentence “consecutive to the parole sentence,” which was still pending. Although Weaver is not entitled to multiple credit, he is entitled to this credit if he has not already received it otherwise. See Garrett v. State, 693 So. 2d 114, 115 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (“[I]f the Department of Corrections has credited Mr. Garrett for this time on the sentence that he was serving when he escaped, then he is not entitled to a duplicate credit on the consecutive escape sentence.”); Bruner v. State, 398 So. 2d 1005, 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (“[A] defendant is entitled to jail time credit for the period of time he was held on the charge which prompted the revocation of probation.
However, it is well settled that a defendant, being held on numerous charges, is not entitled to a multiple credit.”); Watson v. State, 340 So. 2d 961, 962 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (“Expressly, no credit for this time was allowed by the learned trial judge, who stated at appellant’s sentencing that, as a parole violator, appellant was not entitled to credit for time served.
The record does not reflect, however, whether this time was otherwise credited to the offense for which he was previously placed on parole. While he is not entitled to a multiple credit, appellant is entitled to credit if he has not already received it otherwise.”).
Accordingly, we affirm the conviction appealed from, but we remand with directions that the trial court must determine whether credit was applied to the sentence on the parole violation. See Garrett, 693 So. 2d at 115; Bruner, 398 So. 2d at 1005; Watson, 340 So. 2d at 962. If this credit has not been applied, then it must be applied to the instant sentence. See Garrett, 693 So. 2d at 115; Bruner, 398 So. 2d at 1005; Watson, 340 So. 2d at 962.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
WOLF, KAHN and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Weaver v. McDONOUGH, 954 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
Authorities Cited
- DeWayne Lee Bruner v. State, 398 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Watson v. State, 340 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Batts v. State, 693 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Garrett v. State, 693 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)