FRANCIS INGUAGGIATO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2001-10-31
No. 2D01-2570
BLUE, C.J., and DAVIS, J., Concur.
799 So. 2d 1097 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2001)

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion for additional jail credit when the record showed the defendant was entitled to more credit than awarded.


Facts & Procedural History

The appellant sought additional jail credit, alleging he was incarcerated for more days than credited. The trial court denied the motion, but the appe…

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.


Opinion of the Court
STRINGER, Judge.

STRINGER, Judge.

Francis Inguaggiato appeals the summary denial of his motion for additional jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). In his motion, he stated the trial court awarded him 149 days of credit in lower court case numbers 99-21891 and 99-22600. He alleged his sentences should be corrected because he was incarcerated for 216 days prior to sentencing in both cases.

The trial court denied Inguaggiato’s claim and attached a portion of the record which indicates Inguaggiato was incarcer ated for 150 days prior to sentencing in case number 99-21891 and 208 days in case number 99-22600. Because the judgment and sentences in each case indicate the trial court only credited him with 149 days and 207 days respectively, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand with the direction that his sentence be corrected to award him one additional day of credit in each case.

In addition, if Inguaggiato believes the records provided by the trial court are incorrect, he may assert his right to any remedy available to him under rule 3.850. See Hamilton v. State, 752 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

Reversed and remanded.

BLUE, C.J., and DAVIS, J., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw