WILLIAM K. FOLEY, 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 trial court erred in failing to address one claim and failing to attach documentation refuting another claim regarding jail credit.
Foley challenged the denial of his motion for jail credit, alleging entitlement to additional days based on time spent in jail before formal charges a…
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 Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
STRINGER, Judge.
William K. Foley challenges the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence. Foley alleged that he was entitled to 274 more days of jail credit, stemming from three separate claims of error. We affirm the order of the trial court with regard to the time Foley spent in Indian River County jail from May 10, 2001, to December 5, 2001. See Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla.2003). Because the trial court failed to address one claim and failed to attach documentation refuting another, we reverse.
On November 4, 1999, Foley was arrested for forgery, grand theft, resisting/obstructing an officer, and giving a false name. Thirty-three days later, Foley was released on his own recognizance, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.134(1), because no formal charges had been filed. On August 28, 2000, an information was filed for these charges, and Foley was arrested on September 12, 2000. Foley claimed in his motion that he was not released on bond until September 28, 2000. The trial court, in its order, stated that Foley was released on the same day as his arrest, September 12. However, the trial court did not attach any documentation to refute Foley’s claim that he was held until September 28. Because the trial court failed to attach documentation to its order refuting Foley’s claim, we reverse.
Foley also alleged that he did not receive credit for the thirty-three days he spent in jail in 1999 before formal charges were filed. It appears from the record that he is correct. Because the trial court failed to address this claim in its order, we reverse. On remand, if the trial court finds that Foley is not entitled to credit, it must attach documentation to its order which refutes his claims.
Reversed and remanded.
COVINGTON and WALLACE, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bronk v. State, 25 So. 3d 701 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…ourt acknowledges and appreciates the professionalism of the attorney who filed the State’s response. Accordingly, Mr. Bronk is entitled to an award of jail credit in case number CRC07-03696 from March 6, 2007, to July 12, 2007. See Foley v. State, 857 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). We reverse with directions for the post-conviction court to award this jail credit. Because Mr. Bronk may be entitled to a release from prison in February 2010 and the State has recognized the error in this case, we issue our ma…
-
Johnson v. State, 174 So. 3d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…sed the credit due from the issuance of her capias. It is possible that Ms. Johnson was served with her capias while in jail on her war-rantless arrest. The record failed to refute her claim. This was error and requires reversal. See Foley v. State, 857 So. 2d 292, 293 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (reversing the denial of a motion for jail credit because the postconviction court failed to refute the defendant’s claim that he was entitled to credit from the date of his arrest until sentencing). The postconviction court…
Authorities Cited
- Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 2003)