MICHAEL ANGEL OCASIO, 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.
The court held that the trial court must review the record to conclusively refute a defendant's claim for credit for time served.
Appellant sought credit for 426 days served, but the trial court only awarded 256 days. The trial court did not attach documentation conclusively refu…
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
LAGOA, Judge.
Michael Ocasio appeals an order denying his motion under Florida Rule 3.800 for credit for time served. Because the record before us fails to conclusively refute appellant’s claim that he is entitled to 426 days, we are obliged to reverse and remand. See Lundy v. State, 912 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).
The trial court’s order states that appellant is entitled to 256 days, while appellant’s post-conviction motion states that he is entitled to 426 days. The trial court, however, did not attach documentation that conclusively refutes appellant’s claim to such credit. While a conventional evidentiary hearing is not required where the issue involves credit for time served, a trial court must “review the appropriate records and make a determination whether the defendant has received proper credit for time served.” See Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984, 985 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
On remand, the trial court should examine the court file and the jail card, if necessary, to determine whether appellant is entitled to additional credit for time served. Id. Moreover, after said review, the trial court should either attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute the appellant’s claim or award him the appropriate credit for time served.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Doss v. State, 30 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…(b)(1) (evidentiary hearings are permissible as part of 3.800(b) proceedings); cf. Kablitz v. State, 979 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (holding that trial court should resolve jail credit claim raised in 3.800(b) motion on remand); Ocasio v. State, 962 So. 2d 1025 [*638] (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (holding that when a defendant makes a claim that he has been improperly denied credit for time served, the trial court must “review the appropriate records and make a determination whether the defendant has received proper…
Authorities Cited
- Hidalgo v. State, 729 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Norris Lundy, Jr. v. State, 912 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)