JOSHUA BLANKENSHIP, 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.
Joshua Blankenship appealed an order denying his motion for additional jail credit on his sentence. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed that he was not entitled to credit for time served while in Department of Corrections custody, but reversed and remanded because he appeared entitled to one additional day of jail credit (52 days instead of 51) for time spent in county jail between his arrest and plea entry.
The court held that Blankenship was not entitled to credit for time served in DOC custody, but appeared entitled to one additional day of credit (52 days instead of 51) for time spent in county jail between August 26, 2013, and October 16, 2013.
[1] A defendant is not entitled to jail credit for time served in the custody of the Department of Corrections on an unrelated sentence.
[2] A defendant may be entitled to jail credit for time spent in county jail awaiting sentencing after being arrested on a warrant while serving a Department of Corrections s…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“We affirm the trial court's conclusion that Mr. Blankenship is not due credit for time served while in DOC's custody.”
Establishes that time in Department of Corrections custody does not count toward jail credit for a subsequent sentence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBlankenship was arrested on a warrant while in DOC custody serving an unrelated sentence. The warrant was not immediately executed; he was arrested by…
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 Arrest Warrant Execution cases and more on FLexlaw
Joshua Blankenship appeals an order denying his motion for an additional 337 days jail credit related to a conviction and 12-month jail sentence with credit for 51 days. According to his argument, when the arrest warrant in this case was issued, he was in the custody of the Department of Corrections (DOC) serving a sentence in an unrelated case. The warrant was not immediately executed. Rather, he was arrested by the Jacksonville Sheriffs Office months later in the DOC parking lot upon his release from DOC’s custody on August 23, 2013. Mr. Blankenship asserts that he subsequently entered a plea in this case on October 16, 2013, and received the above-described county jail sentence.
In denying Mr. Blankenship’s motion for an additional 337 days jail cred*478it, the trial court found that Mr. Blankenship “was awarded the proper amount of jail time credit for time served, 51 days.” We affirm the trial court’s conclusion that Mr. Blankenship is not due credit for time served while in DOC’s custody. See Gethers v. State, 838 So.2d 504 (Fla.2003); Gregg v. State, 43 So.3d 818 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). But it appears that Mr. Blankenship is entitled to one additional day’s credit — 52 days instead of 51 — for the time spent in jail between August 26, 2013, and October 16, 2013. The State of Florida apparently agrees. Citing Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.514(a), it stated in a response to this court that: “it appears, based on the facts asserted by Appellant, that he would be entitled to 52 days of time served rather than the 51 days awarded by the trial court.”
We recognize that there may be facts not present in the record on appeal which may have informed the trial court’s decision to grant only 51 days credit to Mr. Blankenship. We thus reverse and remand this case for the trial court to attach the portion of the record which refutes Appellant’s entitlement to 52 days credit; to resentence Mr. Blankenship with credit for 52 days of time served; or for other appropriate proceedings consistent with this opinion. See Waye v. State, 114 So.3d 350, 351 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (remanding because Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2)(D) requires the appellate record to “show[] conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief’).
REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.
BENTON, CLARK, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gethers v. State, 838 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 2003)
- Cregg v. State, 43 So. 3d 818 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- Dion R. Waye v. State, 114 So. 3d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)