ROBERT WILLIS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mandamus Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
Robert Willis appeals an order denying his motion seeking additional jail credit, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The trial judge correctly denied the motion, finding that Willis had been credited with all of the time he spent in the county jail on his charges prior to sentencing. See § 921.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). Willis’ motion requested that the court grant additional jail credit for the time he spent in jail after sentencing, awaiting transport to the Department of Corrections. This request should have been made to the Department itself. See § 921.161(2), Fla. Stat. (2008); see also Smith v. State, 932 So.2d 594, 595 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (a “trial court is only required to award credit for pre-sentence jail time; it is the function of the Department of Corrections to award credit for any time served in jail after sentencing but before transfer to state prison”); Leiffer v. State, 867 So.2d 538, 538 n. 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (“For issues involving post-sentencing credit, a defendant must first exhaust his administrative remedies and then seek mandamus relief....”).
AFFIRMED.
PALMER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Valdespino v. State, 209 So. 3d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…rt correctly denied the defendant’s motion to award him credit for this additional time because the trial court only awards credit for pre-sentenc-ing jail time. The award of post-sentencing jail time is the function of the DOC. See Willis v. State, 18 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (affirming the trial court’s order denying Willis’s motion for additional jail credit for time spent in jail after sentencing and holding that Willis’s motion should have been directed to the DOC); Smith v. State, 932 So. 2d 594,…
-
Brown v. State, 160 So. 3d 499 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Reasee v. State, 123 So. 3d 693 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); see also Willis v. State, 18 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (holding that credit for time spent in jail after sentencing must be addressed to the Department of Corrections); Smith v. State, 932 So. 2d 594, 595 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (“[I]t is the function of the Department of Corrections to…
Authorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 932 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Leiffer v. State, 867 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)