COREY DAVIS, 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 trial court erred in summarily denying a motion for jail credit without attaching documentation refuting the claim.
Appellant sought jail credit for the incarcerative portion of a probationary split sentence after violating probation. The trial court denied the moti…
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 Waiver Of Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges the trial court’s summary denial of his rule 3.800(a) motion seeking jail credit for the incarcer-ative portion of his probationary split sentence. Because the trial court failed to attach documentation conclusively refuting the appellant’s allegation or evidencing a waiver of such credit, we reverse.
The appellant alleges that his sentence for violation of probation is illegal because he was not granted credit for the time served on the incarcerative portion of his original sentence. He further contends that he would be entitled to immediate release on his violation of probation sentence if awarded the proper amount of prison credit. The record indicates the appellant received a “probationary split sentence” of three years of incarceration, none of which was suspended, followed by three years of probation. See, e.g., Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161, 164 (Fla.1988.)
Upon violating the probationary portion of a split sentence, a defendant is entitled to credit for time served on the incarcerative portion, unless a waiver of such credit is clearly evidenced in the record. Wells v. State, 751 So. 2d 703, 704 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Singletary v. Slay, 688 So. 2d 319 (Fla.1997). Here, the trial court summarily denied the appellant’s motion for additional jail credit without attaching portions of the record to refute the appellant’s claim. See Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). We, therefore, reverse the order, and remand with instructions to the trial court to attach documentation conclusively refuting the appellant’s allegation or for an award of such credit.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ALLEN, PADOVANO and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Elma v. State, 895 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…r explaining why the original order was “without prejudice,” attach documentation that refutes the defendant’s claim, or provide the defendant with the twenty-four (24) additional days credit for time served in case no. 00-41144. See Davis v. State, 869 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Wallen v. State, 860 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Bohler v. State, 747 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).…
-
Moore v. State, 77 So. 3d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…Court. Moore v. State, 840 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). A defendant is entitled to credit for the time served on the incarcerative portion of a probationary split sentence. Yarbrough v. State, 926 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Davis v. State, 869 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Pierson v. State, 801 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). While the court relied on documents showing credit for the time the defendant spent in county jail, the trial court did not attach documents that conclusively show that the…
-
Parham v. State, 915 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…since the record does not conclusively refute the defendant’s claim to entitlement to credit for 263 days he served in Pinellas County, we reverse the summary denial of that claim and remand for further proceedings on the issue. See Davis v. State, 869 So. 2d 766, 767 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)(where the trial court summarily denied the defendant’s motion for additional jail credit without attaching portions of the record to refute the claim, reversing the order and remanding “with instructions to the trial court t…
Authorities Cited
- Poore v. State, 531 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1988)
- Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Singletary v. Genorval Slay, 688 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 1997)
- Davis v. State, 751 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Wells v. State, 751 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)