ARTHUR DAYMON, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed denial of jail credit motion because trial court failed to either attach refuting records or allow amendment of facially insufficient motion.
A trial court must either attach records refuting a defendant's jail credit claim or grant the defendant an opportunity to amend a facially insufficient motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801.
[1] When a motion for jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801 is facially insufficient, the trial court must either attach portions of the record refuting…
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 intelligenceDaymon sought 215 days of additional jail credit and provided the dates, but his motion was not under oath and failed to allege all necessary informat…
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 Opportunity To Amend Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
Arthur Daymon appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion seeking additional jail credit, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801. We reverse and remand.
Daymon sought 215 days of additional jail credit and provided the dates for which he seeks credit. However, his motion was not under oath as required, and failed to allege all of the information necessary for a facially sufficient rule 3.801 motion. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(c). Pursuant to rule 3.801, unless the record refutes the claim, a defendant is entitled to one chance to amend his motion to state a facially sufficient claim. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(e) (incorporating rule 3.850(f)); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(2) (providing that if motion is facially insufficient, trial court must give defendant sixty days to amend). Here, the trial court denied relief on the merits, but did so without attaching any records supporting the denial. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(e) (incorporating rule 3.850(f)); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(5)' (providing that trial court must attach portions of record refuting defendant’s claims). Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court .to either attach records that refute Daymon’s claim or .grant him the opportunity to amend his facially insufficient claim. Mann v. State, 160 So.3d 554, 555 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.
SAWAYA, ORFINGER and COHEN, JJ., concur.