JAMES C. LANE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
James C. Lane appealed a trial court's award of 1,582 days credit for time served upon re-sentencing after a probation violation. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the record did not conclusively demonstrate Lane's probation release date, potentially entitling him to an additional 23 days of credit.
The court reversed and remanded because the record failed to conclusively demonstrate Lane was not entitled to relief. The trial court on remand must either attach record portions conclusively refuting Lane's claimed probation release date or award him the appropriate credit for time served.
[1] A trial court's award of credit for time served may be reversed and remanded if the record fails to conclusively demonstrate the appellant's entitlement to no relief.
[2] An appellate court may treat an improperly filed motion for post-conviction relief as if it were filed under the correct rule if the record supports such treatment.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 award of 1,582 days of credit for time served is appropriately calculated and supported with the exception that appellant's release date to probation is not conclusively demonstrated by the record”
Establishes that the court found the calculation supported but the critical factual predicate (release date) was unclear
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLane was re-sentenced following a probation violation. The trial court awarded him 1,582 days of credit for time served, calculating this based on a M…
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 Credit For Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
James C. Lane appeals a trial court order granting 1,582 days credit for time served upon a re-sentencing after his violation of probation. Lane urges that he is entitled to 1,627 days credit for time served.1 Based on the record before us, we reverse for re-consideration in one respect.
Upon careful review of the sentence imposed, we find that the award of 1,582 days of credit for time served is appropriately calculated and supported with the exception that appellant’s release date to probation is not conclusively demonstrated by the record. The State avers that the appellant’s release date to probation on the original sentence was March 12, 1999, and based upon that representation, accepted by the trial judge, the court determined that appellant was entitled to 1,582 days of credit for time served. The Affidavit of Probation and a Notice of Inquiry in the record suggests that appellant was admitted to probation on the original offense on April 14, 1999. If the latter is correct, appellant is entitled to an additional twenty-three days of credit for time served.
Because the record before us fails to conclusively demonstrate that the appellant is not entitled to any relief, we reverse the decision of the trial court. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141 (b)(2)(D)(“On appeal from the denial of relief, unless the record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief, the order shall be reversed and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief.”). On remand, the trial court either should attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute appellant’s claim of release date to probation on the original split sentence, or award him the appropriate credit for time served.
Reversed and remanded.
. Lane sought relief below pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.700(a). Rule 3.700(a) is not a cognizable vehicle by which post-conviction relief may be obtained. Hartsfield v. State, 907 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Accordingly, we treat this appeal as if the motion had been filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Hurt v. State, 868 So. 2d 675, 675 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bayron v. State, 921 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…)(D)(“On appeal from the denial of relief, unless the record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief, the order shall be reversed and the cause remanded for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief.”); Lane v. State, 913 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). Reversed and remanded.…
Authorities Cited
- J.J.L. v. State, 868 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Hartsfield v. State, 907 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)