WILLIAM C. FRISS, 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.
Appellate court reversed denial of Rule 3.800(a) motion for jail-time credit because trial court failed to attach documentation refuting defendant's prima facie claim.
Where a defendant makes a prima facie claim for jail-time credit under Rule 3.800(a), the trial court must attach portions of the record conclusively refuting the claim rather than simply denying the motion without documentation.
[1] Under Rule 3.800(a), when a defendant makes a prima facie claim for jail-time credit by providing relevant dates and indicating that jail records would demonstrate entitl…
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 intelligence“It is not the defendant's burden to attach portions of the record showing entitlement to relief, but it is the trial court's responsibility to attach portions conclusively refuting the claim.”
Court explaining the allocation of burden between defendant and trial court in Rule 3.800(a) proceedings.
Friss filed a Rule 3.800(a) motion requesting credit for time served in county jail, and the trial court denied the motion without attaching any docum…
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 Burden Of Proof Allocation cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, J.
Friss filed a 3.800(a) motion requesting that he be given credit for time served in county jail. The trial court denied his motion, but did not attach any documentation conclusively refuting his claim. In Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), this court held that where a defendant alleges a prima facie entitlement to additional credit, Rule 3.800(a) is an available remedy. It is not the defendant’s burden to attach portions of the record showing entitlement to relief, but it is the trial court’s responsibility to attach portions conclusively refuting the claim. Id. see also Phillips v. State, 839 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (trial court' was required to review jail records in ruling on motion to correct illegal sentence, where motion was legally sufficient because it indicated jail records would demonstrate his entitlement to relief, and trial court reviewed only pleading and court file); Swanson v. State, 825 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (defendant made a facially sufficient claim for jail credit under rule 3.800 by providing the dates for which he was seeking credit, providing the date of his sentence, and alleging that the jail certificate would show that he is entitled to credit).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the purpose of allowing the trial court to attach sufficient portions of the record to refute Friss’ claims for jail-time credit. Should the court conclude the motion cannot be decided on the face of the record, it may deny the motion without prejudice so that Friss may file a Rule 3.850 motion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Langdon v. State, 947 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…l court did not attach to its order portions of the transcript conclusively demon [*461] strating that defendant waived entitlement to credit for time served in prison. See Langdon v. State, 947 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 4, 2006); Friss v. State, 881 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)(“It is not the defendant’s burden to attach portions of the record showing entitlement to relief, but it is the trial court’s responsibility to attach portions conclusively refuting the claim.”); see also Futrell v. State, 932 So…
-
Petscher v. State, 936 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…anation or supporting attachments. When a rule 3.800(a) motion states a legally sufficient claim for additional jail credit, a summary denial requires supporting attachments. Washington v. State, 890 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Friss v. State, 881 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Because the trial court failed to attach sufficient portions of the record to refute McIntosh’s claim for additional jail credit, we reverse and remand this matter with directions that the trial court either grant the relief McI…1 / 2
-
McINTOSH v. State, 914 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…nation or supporting attachments. When a rule 3.800(a) motion states a legally sufficient claim for additional jail credit, a summary denial requires supporting attachments. Washington v. State, 890 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Friss v. State, 881 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Because the trial court failed to attach [*512] sufficient portions of the record to refute McIntosh’s claim for additional jail credit, we reverse and remand this matter with directions that the trial court either grant the rel…
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
- Moore v. State, 741 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Swanson v. State, 825 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Renita West v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 825 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Schwartz v. State, 839 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Thomas v. State, 839 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)