JERRY JARBAR ARMSTRONG, 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.
Court affirmed denial of motion to correct illegal sentence, holding that trial court properly ordered credit for time served by checking the appropriate box on the sentencing document, leaving any application disputes to the Department of Corrections.
When a trial court resentences a defendant for probation violation and checks the appropriate box ordering the Department of Corrections to compute and apply credit for time previously served, the court has fulfilled its sentencing responsibility.
[1] When a trial court resentences a defendant for probation violation, the court satisfies its duty to award prison credit by checking the appropriate box on the sentencing…
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 intelligenceArmstrong received a split sentence with an incarcerative portion followed by probation. He was resentenced to prison for violating the probation port…
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 Prison Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
DAVIS, Judge.
Jerry Jarbar Armstrong appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm and write to discuss one claim. Armstrong alleged that when he was sentenced to prison for violating the probation portion of his split sentence, he was not awarded credit for time he previously served in prison during the incarcerative portion of the split sentence. A review of the record indicates that when the trial court resentenced Armstrong to prison for violating his probation, the trial court checked the appropriate box on the sentencing document ordering the Department of Corrections to compute and apply credit for time previously served in prison. See Wiggins v. State, 817 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Downing v. State, 779 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Therefore, the trial court has completed its responsibility, and any challenge Armstrong may have regarding the application of prison credit to his sentence should be raised through the appropriate administrative remedies with the Department of Corrections. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial court without prejudice to any right Armstrong may have to seek such remedies. See Rood v. State, 790 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Affirmed.
FULMER and VILLANTI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Campbell v. State, 884 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…run consecutively. Therefore, the prison sentences shall run concurrently, and the written sentences shall be corrected to conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence. See § 921.16(1); Ashley v. State, 850 So. 2d 1265 (Fla.2003); Hunter v. State, 846 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to correct the written sentences to reflect that the prison sentences are to run concurrently. We note that in his initial brief on appeal, Campbell raised arguments that w…
-
Guerra v. State, 927 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…ment of sentence. Specifically, Guerra alleges the written sentencing order does not reflect the amount of jail credit that the trial court awarded in its oral pronouncement of sentence. Such claim is cognizable under rule 3.800(a). Hunter v. State, 846 So. 2d 1227, 1228 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Watts v. State, 790 So. 2d 1175, 1176 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Williams v. State, 744 So. 2d 1156, 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). If a discrepancy exists between the written sentence and the oral pronouncement, the written sentence mu…
-
Canty v. State, 884 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…he trial court has completed its responsibility, and any challenge Canty may have regarding the application of prison credit to his sentence should first be raised through the appropriate administrative remedies with the DOC. See Armstrong v. State, 846 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). However, if Canty entered into a plea agreement upon violation of probation for a particular prison sentence and the DOC’s forfeiture of gain time has resulted in a longer sentence than that agreed upon, Canty may be entitled to…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rood v. State, 790 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Downing v. State, 779 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Cummings v. State, 779 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Wiggins v. State, 817 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)