RICHARD WHITT, 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.
The court held that a trial court must attach record documents refuting a defendant's jail credit claim when denying it.
Richard Whitt challenged the denial of his motion for jail credit, alleging he was entitled to credit for time served after violating release terms. T…
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 Motion For Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
COVINGTON, Judge.
Richard Whitt challenges the denial of his motion for jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the trial court did not attach any documents from the record refuting Whitt’s claim, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Whitt alleged that he was released on his own recognizance in trial court case number 99-05528 and that he violated the terms of his release when he was arrested on a new charge that resulted in his rearrest in trial court case number 99-05528. Whitt claimed that he was entitled to an extra 187 days’ credit in that case. In alleging that his claim could be determined from the trial court records and the county jail records, Whitt presented a facially sufficient claim for relief. See Searight v. State, 795 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). The trial-court denied the claim without attaching any record documents, such as the sheriffs jail log, that could refute the claim.
We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court again denies the claim, it shall attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute the claim. See McPherson v. State, 750 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Reversed and remanded.
WHATLEY and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Washington v. State, 873 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…s’ credit. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the trial court. On remand, if the trial court again denies this claim, it shall attach those record documents, such as the sheriffs jail log, which conclusively refute the claim. See Whitt v. State, 807 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Reversed and remanded. STRINGER, COVINGTON, and WALLACE, JJ„ Concur.…
-
Hannah v. State, 876 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…ke time spent in county jail. See Smith v. State, 664 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Because the motion and capi-as presented a facially sufficient claim for relief, the trial court should have addressed the merits of the claim. See Whitt v. State, 807 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Smith, 664 So. 2d at 1076. Accordingly, we reverse the denial of this claim and remand for consideration on the merits. In ground eight, Hannah alleged that he was improperly sentenced because certain of the convictions shown on…
-
Joeb v. State, 822 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…Procedure 3.850. See Searight, 795 So. 2d 988. If Joeb files a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion and the trial court again denies the claim, it shall attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute the claim. See Whitt v. State, 807 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Should Joeb file a facially sufficient rule 3.850 motion, the trial court shall either attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute the claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing. Affirmed. WHATLEY and NORTHCUTT,…
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
- McPHERSON v. State, 750 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Searight v. State, 795 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)