TERRANCE C. BROWN, 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.
The trial court erred by summarily denying a motion for jail time credit without attaching records refuting the claim.
Appellant sought additional jail time credit, but the trial court denied his motion without attaching any supporting records. The State conceded that …
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 Summary Denial Of Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
Terrance C. Brown appeals the summary denial of his motion to accredit jail time in which he claimed that he should have received an additional ninety days jail credit against his sentence. The trial court’s order stated simply that Brown had received proper credit for time served in *1017jail; however, no records were attached to the order. We reverse.
The standard of review for an issue involving credit for time served is de novo. Moore v. State, 882 So.2d 977, 980 (Fla. 2004). A trial court may correct a sentence that fails to allow a defendant credit for the time spent in county jail before sentencing. Fla. R. .Crim. P. 3.801(a). If the motion is legally sufficient, and the denial is based on the records in the case, a copy of the portion of the record that conclusively refutes the defendant’s entitlement to relief must be attached to the final order. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(5); Fla. R. Crim.,P. 3.801(e) (stating that rule 3.850(e) applies to rule 3.801).
Commendably, the State concedes that the trial court should have attached the records upon which it relied in denying Brown’s motion. We reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court to proceed as follows: Either attach to the final order a copy of the portion of the record that conclusively refutes Brown’s claimed entitlement to additional jail credit, or if the evidence in the record is lacking, conduct an evidentiary hearing, with Brown present, to determine whether he is entitled to any additional jail credit.
REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
SAWAYA, WALLIS and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wiley v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
-
Wiley v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
Authorities Cited
- Geanetta Moore v. State, 882 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 2004)