DARRELL LAVON JOHNSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2011-06-21
No. 1D11-1634
Davis, J., Roberts, J., Rowe, J.
65 So. 3d 84 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2011)

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed denial of additional jail credit where appellant failed to provide specific dates of incarceration and supporting documentation required to establish entitlement to relief.


Holding

An appellant seeking jail credit must provide specific dates of incarceration, the sentencing date, and cite to record evidence establishing entitlement, and failure to do so renders the claim facially insufficient.


Headnotes

[1] To establish a facially sufficient claim for jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), a movant must provide the specific dates for which credit is s…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Appellant entered a plea agreement on December 15, 2009, calling for 421 days of jail credit, but was not sentenced until October 22, 2010, when he re…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant seeks review of an order denying a request for additional jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The appellant entered into a plea agreement on December 15, 2009, that called for 421 days of jail credit. However, the appellant was not sentenced until October 22, 2010, at which time he was awarded 502 days of jail credit. In the instant motion, the appellant requests credit for an additional 314 days, representing time between entering into the plea agreement and sentencing.

We affirm because the appellant’s allegations are insufficient to demonstrate entitlement to relief. To make a facially sufficient claim for jail credit, an appellant must: (1) provide the dates for which he is seeking credit, (2) provide the date of his sentence, and (3) allege where in the record it can be shown that he is entitled to relief. See Thomas v. State, 634 So.2d 175, 177 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998). The sentencing transcript in the instant case *85indicates that the appellant was released on bond after which he committed new offenses. The appellant’s motion does not specify the dates that he was actually incarcerated on the charges in the present case, or allege when he was arrested, when he bonded out, or when his bond was revoked. In the absence of these allegations and the jail certificates that would establish his entitlement to relief, the appellant’s claim was properly denied. See Decoste v. State, 898 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA2005).

AFFIRMED.

DAVIS, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw