TERRY SMITH, 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 the appellant's motion for prison credit was facially sufficient because he referred to the judgment and sentence in the record.
The appellant sought additional prison credit, arguing the trial court awarded him less than he was entitled to. The trial court denied the motion as …
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.
STRINGER, Judge.
Terry Smith appeals the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Smith raises several claims in his motion; we affirm, on all but one claim, the trial court’s order denying Smith relief.
In his motion, Smith asserted under State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla.1989), that the trial court had failed to give him adequate prison credit in case number 80-390. Smith argued in this claim that he should have received five years of prison credit, not the four years of prison credit given to him by the trial court. At the end of this claim, Smith cited to his judgment and sentence in case number 80-390. The trial court denied Smith’s claim as facially insufficient to meet the standard enunciated in State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1998), because Smith failed to allege that the court records demonstrate on their face that he is entitled to relief. This court finds that Smith’s motion alleged a facially sufficient claim for relief because he referred the court to that portion of the trial court record that would support his claim — his judgment and sentence.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order as to this claim and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court should again deny this claim, it must attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute the claim. We affirm the remainder of the trial court’s order without comment.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
WHATLEY and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Haines v. State, 851 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…s a straight prison-credit claim because he alleged that he had served 987 days in prison before his release to probation on the probationary split sentence, and that his sentencing paperwork would show his entitlement to relief. See Smith v. State, 816 So. 2d 158, 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Defendants are entitled to prison credit for time previously served when they violate the probationary portion of a split sentence. See Layman v. State, 787 So. 2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Appellant’s claim to 987 days of…
-
Petscher v. State, 936 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…seeking credit, the date of her sentence, and alleging that the jail records in the county where she was sentenced would show that she is entitled to the credit sought.”) (citing Swanson v. State, 825 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)); Smith v. State, 816 So. 2d 158, 158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (“At the end of this claim, Smith cited to his judgment and sentence in case number 80-390. The trial court denied Smith’s claim as facially insufficient to meet the standard enunciated in State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 [*6…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- State v. Green, 547 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 1989)