MICHAEL MAYS, 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 court reversed the summary denial of Mays' jail credit motion because it was facially insufficient for lacking the required oath under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801(c), and remanded with instructions to allow amendment.
A motion for correction of jail credit that fails to contain the required oath is facially insufficient and must be dismissed without prejudice to allow amendment.
[1] A motion for correction of jail credit lacking the oath required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801(c) is facially insufficient and must be dismissed without pre…
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“Under Rule 3.801, if a defendant files a legally sufficient motion, the trial court should grant the additional credit or conduct an evidentiary hearing, unless the motion can be conclusively refuted either as a matter of law or by reliance upon the records in the case.”
Court explaining the proper procedure for handling jail credit motions under Rule 3.801.
Michael Mays appealed the summary denial of his motion for correction of jail credit filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801.…
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 Motion For Correction Of Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
Michael Mays appeals the summary denial of his motion for correction of jail credit. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801. Because the trial court failed to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting Mays’ claim, we would normally reverse and remand for attachment of those records or for an evidentiary hearing. See Adkins v. State, 183 So.3d 1102, 1104 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (“Under Rule 3.801, if a *115defendant files a legally sufficient motion, the trial court should grant the additional credit or conduct an evidentiary healing, unless the motion can be conclusively refuted either as a matter of law or by reliance upon the records in the case. If the summary denial is based on the records in the case, a copy of the portion of the files and records that conclusively proves that the defendant is not entitled to relief shall be attached to the final order.”). However, because Mays’ motion is facially insufficient for failing to contain an oath as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801(c), we reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court enter a nonfinal, nonappealable order dismissing the motion and allowing Mays 60 days to amend. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(2); see also Belanger v. State, 146 So.3d 136, 137-38 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (addressing the procedure that should be followed by trial courts when a defendant files a timely but facially insufficient rule 3.801 motion disputing the amount of jail credit awarded).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PALMER, BERGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Adkins v. State, 183 So. 3d 1102 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)
- Belanger v. State, 146 So. 3d 136 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)