ANTONIO MENDEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm the denial of the Appellant’s motion to correct illegal sentence, which he filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We do so without prejudice to the Appellant to file a legally sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion that affirmatively demonstrates from the face of the record that he is entitled to the additional jail credit he seeks. In this case, that means he must allege where in the record information can be found that demonstrates he served time in the Lake County Jail solely because of an Orange County detainer. See Ponce v. State, 24 So.3d 724 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Hamage v. State, 946 So.2d 598 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Alternatively, if the Appellant believes an evi-dentiary hearing is necessary to resolve his claim, he may file a properly sworn rule 3.850 motion. Because the time for filing a rule 3.850 motion expired while this appeal was pending, any rule 3.850 motion must be filed within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the mandate in this case. See Ponce, 24 So.3d at 725.
AFFIRMED without prejudice.
SAWAYA, LAWSON and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gisi v. State, 135 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…etainer. The court further found that because the Bradford County jail credit claim involved disputed issues of fact, it could only be resolved pursuant to rule 3.850. See Montague v. State, 933 So. 2d 1282, 1283 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Mendez v. State, 42 So. 3d 848, 848 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). The postconviction court neither addressed the claims on the merits nor treated the motion as though it were properly filed under rule 3.850 because the motion did not contain a sworn oath as required by rule 3.850(c). How…
-
Wells Fargo Bank v. Chatham, 114 So. 3d 1062 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…had the option of excusing Wells Fargo’s failure to meet its deadline and accepting the amended complaint as timely, the trial court also had the option of enforcing its order as previously noticed. As stated in Eagle’s Crest, LLC v. Republic Bank, 42 So. 3d 848, 852 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2010), “in order to find that the trial court abused its discretion, we must find that the judicial action was arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable. If reasonable men could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the tri…
-
Philippe v. Michael Weiner, M.D., 143 So. 3d 1086 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…0,000, resulting in less of a deficiency, ultimately entitling Weiner to a smaller judgment. A trial court’s decision to admit into evidence an appraisal report is subject to an abuse of discretion standard. See Eagle’s Crest, LLC v. Republic Bank, 42 So. 3d 848, 850 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). To determine the trial court abused its discretion would require us to conclude the judicial action was “arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable.” Id. at 852. The record reflects an evidentiary hearing took place on April 9, 2…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Crespo v. State, 946 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Ponce v. State, 24 So. 3d 724 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)