JOHNNY SANTIAGO, 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.
The court held that a motion for additional jail credit under rule 3.800(a) is legally insufficient if it merely makes a conclusory allegation without referencing the record.
Johnny Santiago appealed the summary denial of his motion for additional jail credit. His motion alleged entitlement to ten days of credit on an Orang…
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 Legal Sufficiency Of Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
Johnny Santiago appeals the summary denial of his motion for additional jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm because the motion is legally insufficient.
Santiago’s motion alleged that he is entitled to ten days of additional jail credit on an Orange County felony case. An error in a trial court’s award of jail credit can be raised at any time in a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). However, the motion must affirmatively allege that the trial court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to re*790lief. A mere conclusory allegation that the answer lies in the record is insufficient to satisfy the pleading requirements of the rule. Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167, 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). At a minimum, a rule 3.800 motion should state where in the record the information can be located and explain how the record demonstrates entitlement to relief. Alfonso v. State, 901 So.2d 939, 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Toro v. State, 719 So.2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). That was not done here, as Santiago merely alleges, without any reference to the record, that he is entitled to additional jail credit.1
If the claim cannot be resolved from the face of the record without resorting to fact-finding, Santiago must file a timely motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Maynard v. State, 763 So.2d 480, 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). We affirm without prejudice so that Santiago can file a legally sufficient motion.
AFFIRMED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
GRIFFIN, ORFINGER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ellis v. State, 135 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…rd is insufficient to satisfy the pleading requirements of the rule. At a minimum, a rule 3.800 motion should state where in the record the information can be located and explain how the record demonstrates entitlement to relief. Santiago v. State, 22 So. 3d 789, 789-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (citations omitted). As Ellis has not identified parts of the record that would tend to demonstrate that a rational jury would not have found that the dwelling was occupied, his motion does not warrant relief. [*482] We c…
-
Griffith v. State, 208 So. 3d 1208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…ecord demonstrates entitlement to relief. id If the entitlement to relief cannot be discerned from the face of the record, without resorting to fact-finding, then the motion must be denied and the relief sought by another method. Santiago v. State, 22 So. 3d 789, 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (holding movant must file rule 3.850 motion instead of rule 3.800 motion if claim cannot be resolved from face of record without resorting to fact-finding). We think this standard applies equally to double jeopardy cases bec…
-
Orta v. State, 41 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…tion was facially insufficient. Our affirmance, however, is without prejudice to Appellant’s right to re-file his motion in a manner that specifies the dates for which Appellant claims an entitlement to additional jail credit. See Santiago v. State, 22 So. 3d 789, 789-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (“[T]he motion must affirmatively allege that the trial court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief. A mere conclusory allegation that the answer lies in the record is insufficient to satisfy the plea…
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
- Hardy v. Hon. Taylor Douglas, 719 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- Williamson v. Penni Lane Williamson, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- Baker v. State, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Maynard v. State, 763 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Mills v. State, 901 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Brown v. State, 912 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)