CARL MYERS A/K/A CARL MEYERS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CARL MYERS A/K/A CARL MEYERS, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
980 So. 2d 1204
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2008)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s denial of the claim as it was alleged in appellant’s initial motion. The trial court properly accepted the state’s position that there was no need for the trial court to clarify the 1994 sentences associated with the 1992 cases. See § 921.16, Fla. Stat. (1993). This affir-mance is without prejudice to appellant refiling a collateral motion to present the claim as revised in his initial brief and rebuttal.
WARNER, KLEIN and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thompkins v. State, 3 So. 3d 438 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…the claim is without prejudice to Thompkins filing a legally sufficient rule 3.800(a) or 3.850 motion in the trial court establishing through specifically identified record evidence that he is entitled to additional jail credit. See Warren v. State, 980 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Toro v. State, 719 So. 2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). We note that Thompkins’s initial brief includes details not included in the motion filed below and therefore not considered by the trial court. To state a sufficient clai…
-
Allen v. State, 57 So. 3d 296 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…rencing a handwritten notation on the plea sheet to the effect that “defendant agrees credit is correct.” We reverse. Allen’s motion was facially sufficient. See Phillips v. State, 839 So. 2d 893, 894 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); see also Warren v. State, 980 So. 2d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “An order denying a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion should include not only ‘valid reasons for the denial by the trial court, but also attachments of portions of the record sufficient to support the denial.’ ” Mac…
-
Rambeau v. State, 985 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…) motion is affirmed without prejudice for appellant to file a new motion that indicates where in the court file or jail [*1226] records information can be located that shows he is entitled to additional credit for jail time served. Warren v. State, 980 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Trapkin v. State, 830 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). If appellant files a new motion, the trial court should consider the jail records in determining whether appellant is entitled to relief. Affirmed. FARMER, TAYLOR and…