BILLY RAY ELKINS, 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.
Billy Ray Elkins appeals the denial of his motion for additional jail credit on his Osceola County conviction. The court reversed, finding that Elkins was arrested in Polk County on an Osceola County bench warrant and remanded for determination of whether he is entitled to credit for the time between his Polk County arrest and transfer to Osceola County.
The court reversed the denial of Elkins's motion, finding that the record indicates he was arrested in Polk County on the Osceola County warrant. The matter was remanded to determine whether Elkins is entitled to the additional credit, noting that if any Polk County charges resulted in a judgment and sentence, he would not receive duplicate credit unless the sentences were ordered concurrent.
[1] A defendant is entitled to jail credit for the time spent incarcerated pursuant to a warrant issued by another county, even if the warrant was not formally executed by th…
[2] A detainer, by itself, does not constitute a formal mandate to hold an inmate; it merely notifies the custodial authority of another jurisdiction's interest in the inmate…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“The primary question, though, is whether Elkins was arrested in Polk County on the bench warrant that had been issued from Osceola County.”
Establishes the central legal issue on appeal regarding whether the defendant was actually arrested on the out-of-county warrant
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceElkins was convicted in Osceola County of resisting an officer without violence and sentenced to 12 months with credit for 118 days. A warrant was iss…
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 Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
PLEUS, J.
Billy Ray Elkins appeals an order which summarily denied his motion for additional jail credit. Elkins was convicted in Osceola County of resisting an officer without violence and sentenced to 12 months incarceration with credit for 118 days.
Elkins had been charged with various offenses in Osceola County, and then failed to appear in court. A warrant was issued for his arrest on August 11, 2003. He was arrested on that warrant in Polk County on August 31, 2003. Elkins sought an additional 143 days of credit from the date of his arrest in Polk County on August 31, 2003, to the date of his transfer to Osceola County on January 21, 2004. Elkins alleged that his entitlement to additional jail credit is clear on the face of the record. See State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1998). Elkins attached to his motion the Polk County arrest report, which shows that he was arrested on the Osceola County bench warrant, as well as for some local Polk County offenses. The circuit court denied his motion because Elkins was not formally arrested by Osceola County authorities until his return to that county on January 21, 2004. The primary question, though, is whether El-kins was arrested in Polk County on the bench warrant that had been issued from Osceola County. See Travis v. State, 724 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
This case is distinguishable from Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla.2003), where authorities in St. Lucie County issued a bench warrant and detainer after Gethers was arrested and taken into custody in Broward County. The warrant from St. Lucie County was not executed until Gethers was returned to that county. The supreme court held that a detainer is not a formal mandate to hold an inmate, but it simply informs the custodial authority that an inmate is wanted in another jurisdiction. See also Price v. State, 598 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). In the instant case, Elkins alleged that he was arrested in Polk County as the result of the Osceola County warrant.
We therefore reverse the order denying relief and remand to the trial court for further proceedings. It appears from the limited record before us that Elkins was arrested in Polk County on both the Osceola County warrant as well as on local Polk County charges. If any of the Polk County charges resulted in a judgment and sentence, Elkins would not be entitled to duplicate credit on his Osceola County sentence unless it was ordered to be served concurrent to the Polk County sentence. See Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla.1986).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIFFIN and MONACO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 932 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…shows that on July 21, 2002, he was arrested on the Citrus County warrant. Therefore, the defendant was taken in custody in Volusia County on the Citrus County warrant prior to his transfer to Citrus County on December 6, 2002.2 See Elkins v. State, 884 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). The State commendably concedes in its response that reversal is appropriate. Although a defendant is not entitled to receive jail credit when a detainer is lodged against him, a defendant who is actually arrested on an outstand…1 / 2
-
Perez v. State, 8 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…was not sentenced on the Volusia County charges or if his sentence in Orange County was ordered to be served concurrently with the Volusia County sentence, he would be entitled to jail credit for the time held in Volusia County. See Elkins v. State, 884 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). As we did in Williams v. State, 4 So. 3d 728 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009), we reverse the order denying Perez’s rule 8.800(a) motion and remand to the trial court to reconsider this issue. REVERSED and REMANDED. PALMER, C.J., TORPY an…
-
Spickerman v. State, 1 So. 3d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…s motion were not conclusively negated in the trial court’s order. On remand, the trial court shall award one additional day and determine whether Appellant is entitled to five additional days while he was held in Lake County. See Elkins v. State, 884 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). REVERSED and REMANDED. PALMER, C.J., TORPY and LAWSON, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 8 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)
- Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1986)
- Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 2003)
- Price v. State, 598 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- Travis v. State, 724 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)