STEVEN PAUL SPICKERMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges the lower court’s order regarding jail credit. The State properly concedes that Appellant is due one additional day not credited by the trial court. In addition, Appellant might be entitled to five days of credit for the period of time during which he was held in the Lake County jail from March 14, 2007, until March 19, 2007. We are unable to determine from the limited record whether Appellant is entitled to credit for these five days but the allegations of his motion were not conclusively negated in the trial court’s order.
On remand, the trial court shall award one additional day and determine whether Appellant is entitled to five additional days while he was held in Lake County. See Elkins v. State, 884 So.2d 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PALMER, C.J., TORPY and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Horner v. State, 236 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)…y January 17, 2018. On January 16, 2018, the State moved for a second extension of time based on an unelaborated scheduling conflict.2 "Mandamus lies to compel a trial court to rule on a motion or petition within a reasonable time." Diaz v. State , 1 So. 3d 337, 338 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) ; accord Johnson v. State , 938 So. 2d 639, 640 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) ; Matthews v. Circuit Ct. , 515 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). As his rule 3.850 motion has now been pending for over two years, Horner has clearly establ…
Authorities Cited
- Elkins v. State, 884 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)