ANTHONY DAVIS, 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.
Anthony Davis appealed the denial of his motion for jail credit on a new sentence, claiming he was entitled to credit for time served on prior sentences. The appellate court initially affirmed but on rehearing reversed, finding the trial court failed to provide adequate documentation and reasoning to support its denial of the credit claim.
The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to attach any documents refuting Davis's claims and the record did not conclusively show whether Davis waived credit for time served. On appeal from a summary denial, the court must reverse unless the post-conviction record conclusively shows the appellant is entitled to no relief.
[1] A trial court order denying a motion for jail credit must be reversed on appeal if the post-conviction record does not conclusively demonstrate that the appellant is enti…
[2] A trial court's summary denial of a motion for jail credit is insufficient when the order does not attach documentation conclusively refuting the defendant's claims.
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“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.”
Establishes the standard of review for summary denials of post-conviction relief motions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDavis filed a motion for credit for time served on prior sentences to be credited toward sentencing on a new offense. The motion involved five separat…
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 Credit For Jail Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
Anthony Davis seeks rehearing of this Court’s December 14, 2016 per curiam af-firmance of the trial court’s July 29, 2016 order denying his motion for jail credit. We grant rehearing, withdraw our prior opinion, and reverse.
Davis filed a motion for credit for time served on prior sentences to be credited toward sentencing on a new offense. The trial court denied the motion, finding that a defendant “is only entitled to credit against each sentence for time spent in jail for the charge which led to that sentence.” The trial court’s order did not attach any documentation in support. This case involves five separate trial court case num*202bers1, filed in four different years, presumably with offenses having distinctive arrest dates, with different dates for original periods of incarceration in jail leading up to the ultimate sentence. Merely stating in the written order that a defendant is only entitled to credit for time spent in jail for each charge does not establish how the calculations were made and what the relevant dates are for each of the different cases. The. State, in its Response to our order to show cause, indicates that some of the earlier cases had involved probation and probation revocations, such that all five cases were sentenced together in 2015 as a result of a plea agreement. The State notes that this, in turn, raises the question of whether time spent in jail on any of the individual cases prior to February 6, 2014, was waived as part of a plea agreement. Absent the following documentation, the above-noted questions cannot be evaluated: 1) the original sentencing documents on each of the five cases; 2) the current sentencing documents on each of the five cases; 3) a transcript of the most recent sentencing.proceeding to ascertain whether there was a waiver of prior credits for time served; 4) any written waiver of prior credits for time served; 5) forms prepared by the county jail reflecting dates of incarceration on each of the five cases prior to the most recent sentencing; 6) documentation reflecting accurate arrest dates on each of the five cases.
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) and' (D)'. Because the trial court failed to attach any documents refuting Davis’s claims, and the record does not conclusively show whether Davis waived any credit for time served, we reverse the order on appeal and remand for further proceedings or to attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute Davis’s claims. See Roche v. State, 967 So.2d 340 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“Because we cannot determine from the lower court’s order or record attachments whether the defendant waived his credit for time served, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing or other appropriate relief.”); Lundy v. State, 912 So.2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Barfield v. State, 900 So.2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Cozza v. State, 756 So.2d 272 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); see also Louis v. State, 143 So.3d 452, 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (“When a factual dispute exists, and the files and records do not conclusively show appellant is entitled to no relief, an evidentiary hearing is generally required.”).
Rehearing granted; reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ayala v. State, 231 So. 3d 582 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…erely stating in the written order that a defendant is only entitled to credit for time spent in jail for each charge does not establish how the calculations were made and what the relevant dates are for each of the different cases.” Davis v. State, 219 So. 3d 201, 202 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). 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 l…
-
Perez v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…thereafter either attach records to its denial order that conclusively show that the Appellant is not entitled to any additional jail credit, or if the claim cannot be so refuted by the records, hold an evidentiary hearing. See Davis v. State, 219 So. 3d 201 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.…
-
Utria v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…erved prior to sentencing pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for the trial court to determine whether Utria is entitled to additional credit for jail time served. See Davis v. State, 219 So. 3d 201 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). Utria was sentenced on March 15, 2018, to twenty-four months in prison in case number F16-1233A, concurrent with the twenty-four month sentence imposed on the same date in case number F16-1415. The plea agreement encompassing bo…
Authorities Cited
- Connor McDUFFIE v. Scotty's, Inc., 756 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
- Cozza v. State, 756 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Norris Lundy, Jr. v. State, 912 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Antonious Louis v. State, 143 So. 3d 452 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)
- Barfield v. State, 900 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Colandro Peters v. State, 900 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Roche v. State, 967 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)