HARRY J. KEENE, 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.
Keene challenges the trial court's denial of his motion for pre-sentencing credit for time served under a detainer placed while he was incarcerated in state prison. The court reverses, extending the Bryant rule to apply to detainers lodged in state prison, not just county jail, and remands for further proceedings.
The court holds that Keene presented a facially sufficient claim for relief and reverses the trial court's denial. The court extends the Bryant rule to apply to detainers lodged in state prison (not just county jail), and remands for the trial court to determine whether Keene is entitled to credit under this standard.
[1] A claim for pre-sentencing credit is facially sufficient if it alleges the date a detainer was lodged while the defendant was incarcerated and asserts that the claim is d…
[2] Pre-sentencing credit may be awarded when a detainer is lodged against an individual incarcerated in state prison for new charges or a violation of probation.
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“Keene has thus presented a facially sufficient claim for relief.”
Establishes that Keene's allegations regarding the detainer and its date satisfied the facial sufficiency 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 intelligenceKeene was serving a sentence in Florida State Prison when a Highlands County detainer was placed on him for new charges or a probation violation. He f…
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 Facially Sufficient Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
CASANUEVA, Judge.
Harry J. Keene challenges the order of the trial court denying his motion for pre-sentencing credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Keene alleged that he was entitled to credit against his prison sentence in the present case from the date a detainer was placed on him while he was serving a different sentence in Florida State Prison. The trial court found that the claim was facially insufficient; however, Keene alleged that the Highlands County detainer was placed on him while in prison, and he even provided the date the detainer was lodged. Keene further alleged that the claim was determinable from a review of the trial court records. Keene has thus presented a facially sufficient claim for relief. See Toto v. State, 805 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
The trial court also denied the motion on the merits, correctly finding that Bryant v. State, 787 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), only applied to individuals being held in county jail pursuant to a detainer from another county. However, in the interests of consistency and fairness, we now apply Bryant to situations where an individual has a detainer lodged against him for new charges or a violation of probation while he is incarcerated in state prison.1 We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We note that if the trial court record is silent as to when the detainer was lodged, the claim may not be resolved pursuant to rule 3.800(a) because it cannot be determined from the face of the record. If such is the case, Keene may present his claim in a timely, facially sufficient motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Bryant, 787 So. 2d 68.
Because the resolution of this case is premised upon the reasoning in Bryant, which is presently before our supreme court, we certify conflict with Tatum v. State, 811 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
Reversed and remanded.
WHATLEY and SALCINES, JJ., concur. . If this were not the case, a detainer based on a violation of probation from one county could be lodged against a defendant who is in prison on the charges from another county. If he were not arrested on the violation of probation until he finished his prison sentence, he would be entitled to credit only from the date of the arrest.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McRAE v. State, 820 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…endant is entitled to receive credit for time spent in jail in Florida if the sentencing county places a detainer on the defendant while the defendant is in another county’s jail. Bryant v. State, 787 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). In Keene v. State, 816 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), the court extended Bryant by applying it to detainers that are placed on a defendant while in a Florida prison. However, apart from the erroneous holding in Mazza, this entitlement has not been extended to incarceration outside t…
-
Wiggins v. State, 817 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…s serving a sentence in state prison on another case, Wiggins would be entitled to credit against the prison sentences imposed upon revocation of probation from the date the detainer was lodged with the Department of Corrections. See Keene v. State, 816 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). We therefore affirm the denial of Wiggins’ jail credit claim. Our affirmance is without prejudice to any right Wiggins might have to file a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion or a timely, facially sufficient rule 3.850 moti…
-
Johnson v. State, 932 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…ion, Johnson claims he is entitled to additional jail credit in both 03-CF-012696 and 03-CF-014214 for the time he served in jail or prison from his arrest on July 27, 2003, until his sentencing in both cases on February 24, 2004. In Keene v. State, 816 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), this court held that a defendant who is serving a prison sentence is entitled to jail credit from the date the detainer on a new charge or a violation of probation is lodged against him while he is in prison. Keene relied on Brya…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bryant v. State, 787 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Tatum v. State, 811 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Toto v. State, 805 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)