GEORGE EDMUND MCALLISTER, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed denial of defendant's rule 3.800(a) motion for additional jail time credit, finding the motion facially insufficient for failing to demonstrate entitlement to relief on its face.
A rule 3.800(a) motion for additional jail time credit must be facially sufficient by alleging facts demonstrating entitlement to relief on the face of the record.
[1] A rule 3.800(a) motion must be facially sufficient by alleging facts demonstrating entitlement to relief from the face of the record.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGeorge Edmund McAllister sought additional jail time credit for incarceration prior to sentencing on a probation violation. The trial court denied his…
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 Probation Violation Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PALMER, J.
George Edmund McAllister (defendant) appeals the trial court’s order denying his rule 3.800(a) motion, in which he asserted he was entitled to receive additional jail time credit for the time he spent incarcerated prior to sentencing on his violation of probation. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a). We affirm. The trial court, in a form order, denied the defendant’s motion with a notation “previously denied.” However, the court order contains no attachments of any prior orders or other documents supporting the determination that the defendant’s motion was previously denied or otherwise refuting the defendant’s claim. The denial of a rule 3.800(a) motion as successive must include an attachment of the prior motion and order. See Lewis v. State, 730 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). On the other hand, the defendant’s motion is facially insufficient because it fails to allege that the record on its face demonstrates an entitlement to relief. See State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1998); Toomajan v. State, 785 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
Accordingly, the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s rule 3.800(a) motion is affirmed, but without prejudice to the defendant filing a facially sufficient motion.
AFFIRMED.
SHARP, W. and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miller v. State, 881 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…PER CURIAM. The trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to withdraw guilty plea is affirmed without prejudice to the defendant filing a facially sufficient motion. See McAllister v. State, 840 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Affirmed without prejudice.…
-
Drew L. White v. State, 847 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…White is not entitled to credit for time served in The Bridge Substance Abuse Program, Hill v. State, 813 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), nor has he demonstrated entitlement to credit for his time spent in Seminole County Jail, McAllister v. State, 840 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). However, the State concedes that the trial court made a mathematical error in computing the award. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the lower court only for correction of the mathematical error. REVERSED and REMANDED. S…
-
Rose v. State, 871 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…ows on its face his entitlement to additional credit and states the relevant dates to support his claim. Should the trial court again deny the motion as successive, the court must attach copies of the prior motion and order. See McAllister v. State, 840 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). AFFIRMED without prejudice. SAWAYA, C.J., and TORPY, J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Toomajan v. State, 785 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Regan v. State, 730 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)