KENNETH W. MATHIS, 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.
Kenneth Mathis appeals the summary denial of his motion for jail credit in a failure to appear case. The court reverses and remands because disputed factual issues regarding his arrest date require resolution under Rule 3.850 rather than the summary procedure under Rule 3.800(a).
The court reversed the summary denial and remanded the case, holding that jail credit issues involving disputed factual matters must be resolved under Rule 3.850 rather than Rule 3.800(a), and that Mathis' sworn motion is facially sufficient under Rule 3.850.
[1] A motion for jail credit involving disputed issues of fact must be resolved pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
[2] A trial court must reconsider a motion for jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 when a factual dispute exists regarding the defendant's date of arre…
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“Although Mr. Mathis sought relief under rule 3.800(a), jail credit issues involving disputed issues of fact can only be resolved pursuant to rule 3.850.”
Establishes the key procedural holding that disputed factual issues in jail credit claims require Rule 3.850 rather than Rule 3.800(a).
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMathis was arrested for child abuse on June 26, 2004, and released on bond. He failed to appear on April 11, 2005, and was rearrested on April 13, 200…
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 Disputed Issues Of Material Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
LaROSE, Judge.
Kenneth W. Mathis appeals the summary denial of his motion for jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand for further proceedings.
On June 26, 2004, Mr. Mathis was arrested for child abuse in case number 04-02766-CFAWS-4. The trial court released him on bond, but when Mr. Mathis failed to appear on April 11, 2005, he was rearrested on April 13, 2005. The State charged him, in case number 05-02794-CFAWS-4, with failure to appear. Mr. Mathis claims entitlement to jail credit in the failure to appear case for time spent in county jail from April 28, 2005, to August 9, 2005. Mr. Mathis attached to his rule 3.800(a) motion a county complaint affidavit reflecting that he was arrested on April 28, 2005, for failure to appear. The county complaint affidavit, however, refers to case number 04-02766-CFAWS-4, the child abuse case.
The postconviction court concluded that Mr. Mathis was not incarcerated in case number 05-02794-CFAWS-4 until June 14, 2005. The postconviction court attached to its order another county complaint affidavit reflecting that Mr. Mathis was arrested on a Pasco County warrant in' case number 05-02794-CFAWS-4 on June 14, 2005. This affidavit, too, described the charge as a failure to appear. Both Mr. Mathis and the postconviction court attached county complaint affidavits referring to the failure to appear charge; each, however, refers to a different case number and shows a different arrest date. Thus, an unresolved factual dispute remains concerning Mr. Mathis’ date of arrest for the failure to appear charge.
Although Mr. Mathis sought relief under rule 3.800(a), jail credit issues involving disputed issues of fact can only be resolved pursuant to rule 3.850. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850; Clifton v. State, 905 So. 2d 1042, 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Mr. Mathis’ timely filed, sworn motion is facially sufficient under rule 3.850. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for reconsideration by the postconviction court. On remand, the postconviction court shall review the claim pursuant to rule 3.850.
Reversed and remanded.
ALTENBERND and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Richie v. State, 959 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…ie’s claim, finding that it was facially insufficient because he failed to provide proof of his Hillsborough County confinement. “[J]ail credit issues involving disputed issues of fact can only be resolved pursuant to rule 3.850.” Mathis v. State, 945 So. 2d 588, 588 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (citing [*434] Clifton v. State, 905 So. 2d 1042, 1044 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)). Because Richie’s claim for jail credit involves a disputed issue of fact and he filed his sworn motion within two years of his violation of probation…
Authorities Cited
- Clifton v. State, 905 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)