RICKY JESEL, 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.
Ricky Jesel appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for additional jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), claiming he was entitled to 18 additional days of credit beyond the 130 days awarded. The appellate court remanded the case because the record did not include the plea agreement or plea transcript needed to conclusively refute Jesel's claims.
The appellate court held that Jesel's motion properly alleged where in the record the information could be found to demonstrate his entitlement to relief, and because the record did not contain a copy of the plea transcript or agreement that would refute his claims, the matter must be remanded to the trial court for attachment of those portions of the record that conclusively refute Jesel's claims.
[1] A motion seeking additional jail credit pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) must be remanded for attachment of record portions that conclusively refut…
[2] Jail time credit issues are appropriately raised in a rule 3.800 motion where the record reflects that the defendant has served time for which he was not credited.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“A defendant is entitled to jail credit from the date that he is served with an arrest warrant until he is sentenced.”
Establishes the general rule for entitlement to jail credit in Florida.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJesel pleaded nolo contendere to burglary, obstructing an officer, grand theft, and dealing in stolen property across three criminal cases. He receive…
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 Motion For Additional Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ricky Jesel appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion seeking additional jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the record does not conclusively refute Jesel’s claims, we remand this matter to the trial court for attachment of those portions of the record that would refute the claims.
Jesel pled nolo contendere to burglary of a dwelling, obstructing an officer without violence and grand theft in case number 2007-02300-CFAWS, dealing in stolen property in case number 2007-023230-CFAWS, and grand theft in case number 2007-02812-CFAWS. Apparently, Jesel’s plea agreement called for a sentence of 18 months prison in each case, with each sentence running concurrently with the others.1 He was awarded 130 days jail credit. He now contends that he was actually incarcerated for a total of 148 days prior to his sentencing and is entitled to an additional 18 days credit. The trial court denied Jesel’s motion, finding that “as part of the plea agreement, the defendant was given 130 days stipulated high jail credit.” The plea agreement and the plea and sentencing transcript were not appended to the order, nor was any other document reflecting such an agreement.
Jail time credit issues are appropriately raised in a rule 3.800 motion where the record reflects that the defendant has served time for which he was not credited. State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1998). A defendant is entitled to jail credit from the date that he is served with an arrest warrant until he is sentenced. Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504, 507 (Fla.2003). Credit for time served may be waived, however, as part of a plea agreement. Joyner v. State, 988 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Render v. State, 802 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).
Jesel’s motion properly alleged where in the record the information could be found demonstrating his entitlement to relief. Toro v. State, 719 So. 2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Since we must accept Jesel’s allegations as true and the record contains no copy of Jesel’s plea transcript or agreement that would refute it, we must remand this matter to the trial court for attachment of those portions of the record conclusively refuting Jesel’s claims.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
ORFINGER, LAWSON and COHEN, JJ., concur. . The record does not reflect whether the plea agreement was in writing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thompkins v. State, 3 So. 3d 438 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…claim, Thompkins must allege and identify records showing the date the Broward County arrest warrant(s) was formally served on him while he was in the Miami-Dade County jail. See Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla.2003); see also Jesel v. State, 995 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Ervin v. State, 971 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). GROSS, C.J, WARNER and MAY, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 2003)
- Hardy v. Hon. Taylor Douglas, 719 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- Joyner v. State, 988 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Terrius Render v. State, 802 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)