EARL L. GRANT, JR., 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.
Court reversed summary denial of postconviction jail credit motion because trial court failed to attach record portions conclusively refuting the claim, despite correctly identifying the legal standard.
A postconviction court denying a Rule 3.800(a) motion must attach portions of the record that conclusively refute the defendant's allegations.
[1] A postconviction court denying a Rule 3.800(a) motion must attach portions of the record that conclusively refute the defendant's allegations, and failure to do so requir…
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“The burden is on the postconviction court to attach portions of the record refuting the rule 3.800(a) claim.”
Court citing Spears v. State to establish the procedural requirement for denying postconviction motions.
Grant claimed he did not receive jail credit for time spent in Pinellas County jail from December 2005 through June 2006 in case 06-12442.…
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 Jail Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
CASANUEVA, Judge.
Earl L. Grant, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the post-conviction court failed to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting Mr. Grant’s claim, we reverse.
Mr. Grant alleges that he did not receive all jail credit for the time he was in the Pinellas County jail. Specifically, he alleges that he did not receive jail credit from December 2005 through June 2006, in case 06-12442. The postconviction court, relying on Whitehurst v. State, 654 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), correctly found that Mr. Grant was only entitled to credit against each sentence for time spent in jail on those charges. However, the postcon-viction court failed to attach portions of the record to conclusively refute Mr. Grant’s allegations. “The burden is on the postconviction court to attach portions of the record refuting the rule 3.800(a) claim.” Spears v. State, 920 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Therefore, we reverse the order denying the rule 3.800(a) motion and remand for further proceedings. If the postconviction court again denies Mr. Grant’s motion, it shall attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute the claim.
Reversed and remanded.
SALCINES and STRINGER, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Martice D. Spears v. State, 920 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Whitehurst v. State, 654 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)