WILLIE CHEATUM, 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.
Willie Cheatum appealed a trial court's denial of his motion for additional jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, finding that the trial court's single attachment did not conclusively refute Cheatum's claim and requiring the court to either grant the motion or provide sufficient record support for its denial.
The court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court's single attachment did not conclusively refute Cheatum's claim of entitlement to additional jail credit. The court ordered the trial court to either grant the motion if appropriate or attach copies of those portions of the record supporting its denial.
[1] A trial court's order denying a motion for jail credit under rule 3.800(a) must be supported by attachments that conclusively refute the defendant's claim, or the order m…
[2] A written plea agreement alone may not conclusively demonstrate a defendant's clear intent to waive jail credit accrued prior to a probationary violation.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“we reverse and remand with instructions that the court either grant the motion, if appropriate, or attach copies of those portions of the record that support its denial”
Establishes the court's holding that the trial court must either grant the motion or provide sufficient record documentation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCheatum filed a rule 3.800(a) motion seeking additional jail credit, alleging that his entitlement to more jail credit was apparent from the sentencin…
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 Face Of The Record cases and more on FLexlaw
LAWSON, J.
Willie Cheatum appeals from an order denying his rule 3.800(a)1 motion seeking additional jail credit. Cheatum’s motion alleges that his entitlement to more jail credit is apparent from the face of the record, particularly pointing to the transcripts from his sentencing hearings. The State concedes that the single attachment to the trial court’s denial order does not conclusively refute Cheatum’s claim.2 Accordingly, we reverse and remand with instructions that the court either grant the motion, if appropriate, or attach copies of those portions of the record that support its denial. See, e.g., Brown v. State, 816 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). “If the claim cannot be resolved from the face of the record without resorting to fact-finding, [defendant] must file a timely motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.” Petscher v. State, 936 So. 2d 639, 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (Orfinger, J., concurring).
REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
PALMER, C.J., and EVANDER, J., concur. . Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a).
. The trial court attached a copy of Chea-tum’s violation of probation plea agreement to its order. This document contains language which arguably contemplates a waiver of any time served prior to Cheatum's arrest on the probationary violation. However, the written plea agreement, standing alone, does not demonstrate Cheatum's clear intent to waive jail credit accrued prior to his arrest on the violation. See, e.g., Hill v. State, 985 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). The document states that Cheatum agreed to a sentence of "18 months D.O.C. from the date of arrest on the violation,” but also states that the "actual number of days to be awarded as time served credit will be calculated and awarded by the Lake County Jail ... as appropriate, unless specifically indicated otherwise above.” It is possible that the transcript of the plea hearing demonstrates Cheatum's clear intent to waive any time served prior to his probationary violation. However, a denial on this basis would also need to include attachments showing the time between Chea-tum’s arrest on the violation and his sentencing, to conclusively refute Cheatum’s allegations.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Canada v. State, 1 So. 3d 338 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…nal prison sentence, or include as an attachment to any denial order documents which demonstrate Canada’s clear intent to waive credit for the jail time served while awaiting disposition of his community supervision violations. See Cheatum v. State, 992 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. SAWAYA, J., and PLEUS, R., Senior Judge, concur. . Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a).…
-
Boyd v. State, 57 So. 3d 268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…movant makes a legally sufficient allegation that he did not receive the proper credit for time served, it is the trial court’s obligation to conclusively negate the claim by attaching the portion of the record to refute the claim. Cheatum v. State, 992 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). This is because we only receive an abbreviated record in proceedings of this nature, and we are required by rule 9.141(b)(2)(D) to reverse any summary denial unless the record “shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled t…
-
Smith v. State, 52 So. 3d 781 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…2007 plea agreement’s language that the suspended sentence begins from the date of his VOP arrest appears to, but does not unequivocally demonstrate, Appellant’s clear intent to waive jail credit for earlier time served. See, e.g., Cheatum v. State, 992 So. 2d 877, 878 n. 2 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (remanding, where plea colloquy not part of record, for attachments to demonstrate plea agreement’s statement that defendant’s agreement to a sentence from the date of arrest on the violation showed clear intent to waiv…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Petscher v. State, 936 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- In re T/U/W Albert Pollak v. Berkett, 816 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Brown v. State, 816 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Hill v. State, 985 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)