JOHN S. MILNE, 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.
Milne appealed the summary denial of his Rule 3.800(a) motion seeking jail time credit for the period between his re-arrest after escaping and sentencing on the escape charge. The court affirmed, holding that the motion was facially insufficient and procedurally improper, as jail credit claims must be pursued through administrative channels at the Department of Corrections and, if necessary, by writ of mandamus rather than through Rule 3.800(a).
A Rule 3.800(a) motion is not the proper vehicle for seeking jail time credit in these circumstances. The motion is facially insufficient because it fails to demonstrate entitlement to relief from the trial court records on their face. Additionally, the claim is procedurally improper because jail credit must first be sought through administrative channels at the Department of Corrections and, if necessary, through a petition for writ of mandamus in circuit court, not through Rule 3.800(a).
[1] A motion for jail time credit is facially insufficient if it fails to allege that the trial court records demonstrate an entitlement to relief and to specify where in the…
[2] A defendant seeking jail time credit for time spent incarcerated between escaping and being sentenced for the escape must first exhaust administrative remedies with the D…
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“the motion is facially insufficient because it fails to allege that the trial court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief and to specify where in the record the necessary information can be located”
Establishes the facial insufficiency standard for Rule 3.800(a) motions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMilne escaped from an original sentence of incarceration and was subsequently re-arrested. He filed a Rule 3.800(a) motion in the escape case seeking …
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 Credit For Jail Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
[*726] STEVENSON, J.
We affirm the order summarily denying appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion seeking credit for jail time served from the time of his re-arrest after escaping, to the time he was sentenced on the escape charge. Although appellant filed the motion in the escape case, he is actually seeking credit against his original sentence of incarceration, from which he escaped. In any event, appellant’s claim is facially and procedurally improper.
First, the motion is facially insufficient because it fails to allege that the trial court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief and to specify where in the record the necessary information can be located and how the record demonstrates his entitlement to relief. See Skullestad v. State, 790 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Toro v. State, 719 So. 2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
Secondly, the claim is procedurally improper. If appellant is entitled to credit against the original sentence for time spent in jail prior to resolution of his escape charge, as he may well be, credit must first be sought through administrative channels at the Department of Corrections and, after exhausting those administrative remedies, through a petition for writ of mandamus filed in the circuit court. See Adams v. Wainwright, 275 So. 2d 235 (Fla.1973) (finding that the time awaiting an escape trial is a mandatory continuation of the original sentence as a matter of law, so a defendant is due credit for time served in county jail between capture and completion of the escape trial); Knight v. State, 681 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)(noting that the DOC has the responsibility of granting post-sentencing jail credit through administrative proceedings); see also Moreland v. State, 700 So. 2d 800, 801 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (same).
Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to appellant seeking relief through the appropriate means.
FARMER and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reeves v. State, 987 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…If the defendant believes that he was not awarded the correct credit for time served, gain time, or provisional release credit in case numbers 90-11502, 90-11504, and 90-40526, he must first exhaust his administrative remedies. See Milne v. State, 807 So. 2d 725, 726 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Smith v. State, 706 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). If the defendant is unsuccessful, he may file a motion in the circuit court of Miami-Dade County pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 to address his entitl…
-
Taylor v. State, 145 So. 3d 948 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…Williams v. State, 957 So. 2d 600 (Fla.2007). 1. Postconviction Court’s Ruling The postconviction court is correct that a defendant is not entitled to credit against an escape sentence for time served awaiting the escape trial. See Milne v. State, 807 So. 2d 725, 726 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). However, here appellant did not allege that he was entitled to the credit. He alleged the trial court had already awarded him that credit during the oral pronouncement of his sentence. “[A] court’s oral pronouncement of a s…
-
Darion Northrup Castle v. State, 811 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Milne v. State, 807 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). STEVENSON, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hardy v. Hon. Taylor Douglas, 719 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- Adams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 275 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1973)
- Moreland v. State, 700 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Skullestad v. State, 790 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Knight v. State, 681 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)