DAVID AGHARAUMUNNA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
David Agharaumunna appealed a trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence, arguing he was entitled to credit for time served during probation violation proceedings. The Florida appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court's order relied on a purported plea agreement that was not clearly documented in the record.
The court reversed and remanded because the attached documents did not conclusively refute Agharaumunna's claim that he was owed credit for time served. A waiver of credit for time served must be clearly shown on the record and cannot be presumed, and the trial court must attach record excerpts including probation violation and plea hearing transcripts to support summary denial.
[1] A defendant's waiver of credit for time served must be clearly shown on the record and cannot be presumed.
[2] A trial court's order denying a motion to correct an illegal sentence must be reversed and remanded if the attached records do not conclusively refute the appellant's cla…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Although a defendant can waive credit for time served in prison on the original sentence as part of a negotiated plea agreement, such waiver must be clearly shown on the record and cannot be presumed.”
Establishes the legal standard that waivers of credit for time served must be explicit and documented, not presumed from incomplete records.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAgharaumunna violated his probation and was sentenced without credit for time served. He filed a Rule 3.800(a) motion seeking credit for time served p…
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 Waiver Of Credit For Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
David Agharaumunna appeals from a trial court order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand for attachment of records that conclusively refute the appellant’s claim.
Agharaumunna violated his probation and upon sentencing was given no credit for time served. He filed a rule 3.800(a) motion seeking credit for the time he served prior to his probation violation. The trial court denied relief and the order states that the defendant was given no credit for time served “per plea agreement,” and attached the docket and sentence to support its decision. The docket and sentence, however, give no indication of a plea agreement and instead note that no credit for time served was given “per court.”
We agree with the defendant that the attached documents do not conclusively refute his claim that he is owed credit for time served. “Although a defendant can waive credit for time served in prison on the original sentence as part of a negotiated plea agreement, such waiver must be clearly shown on the record and cannot be presumed.” Isaac v. State, 992 So.2d 304, 305 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); see also Rudicil v. State, 31 So.3d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (reversing for attachment of plea colloquy because the trial court’s note on the attached sentencing sheet that *268Rudicil entered a negotiated plea, and that per the terms of the plea, had waived entitlement to CTS, was insufficient to show knowing and express waiver of CTS). If Agharaumunna, during the probation violation pi-oceedings, did not clearly and expressly waive his right to credit for the time he served during the incarcerative part of his ox-iginal split sentence, then he is entitled to such. See Isaac, 992 So.2d at 305.
On appeal from a summary denial, this Court must reverse unless the post-conviction record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(A), (D). Because the record now before us fails to make the required showing, we reverse the order and remand for further proceedings. If the trial court again enters an order summarily denying the post-conviction motion, the court shall attach record excerpts — including the transcript of the probation violation and plea hearing — conclusively showing that the appellant is not entitled to any relief.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Elton Bolduc v. State, 251 So. 3d 314 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
-
Klein v. State, 237 So. 3d 1105 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
-
Villalona v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Isaac v. State, 992 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Rudicil v. State, 31 So. 3d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)