JONATHAN WRIGHT, 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.
Jonathan Wright appealed the denial of his motion for additional jail and prison credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to attach documentary evidence proving the claims were successive or previously decided on the merits, as required by Florida procedural rules.
The trial court's denial was improper because it failed to comply with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(f)(5), which requires that if a denial is based on the records, a copy of the portion of the files and records conclusively showing the defendant is entitled to no relief must be attached to the final order.
[1] A trial court must attach portions of the record that conclusively show a defendant is entitled to no relief when denying a motion for postconviction relief based on prio…
[2] A defendant is prohibited from raising the same illegal sentencing claim in a successive postconviction motion if it has already been decided on the merits.
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“If the denial is based on the records in the case, a copy of that portion of the files and records that conclusively shows that the defendant is entitled to no relief shall be attached to the final order.”
Establishes the mandatory procedural requirement that trial courts must attach documentary evidence when denying postconviction motions based on the record.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWright was convicted in 1985 of numerous crimes and sentenced to 150 years' consecutive imprisonment. He was resentenced in 2007 following a motion to…
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 Prison Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
Jonathan Wright appeals the denial of a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), alleging an entitlement to additional jail and prison credit. For the reason discussed below, we reverse and remand.
In 1985, Appellant was convicted of numerous crimes and sentenced to consecutive terms of 150 years’ imprisonment. In 2007, he was resentenced in response to a motion to correct illegal sentence. See Wright v. State, 941 So.2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). He filed the instant motion for postconvietion relief in July 2013, alleging an entitlement to additional credit for time spent in the Duval County Jail and for time spent in prison prior to being resen-tenced.
The trial court denied the motion on the ground that Appellant has unsuccessfully raised the issues numerous times. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(d) (“No successive motions for jail credit will be considered.”); State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287, 290 (Fla. 2003) (although there is no ban on filing successive 3.800(a) motions, collateral es-toppel prohibits a defendant from raising the same illegal sentencing claim which has already been raised in a prior postcon-viction motion and decided against him on the merits). However, the trial court failed to attach any documents indicating the issues raised in the motion were previously determined to be meritless. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(e) (incorporating portions of rule 3.850, including subsection (f)); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(5) (“If the denial is based on the records in the case, a copy of that portion of the files and records that conclusively shows that the defendant is entitled to no relief shall be attached to the final order.”); Arnold v. State, 949 So.2d 1141 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (reversing denial of rule 3.800(a) motion because trial court failed to attach portions of the record that demonstrate the motion was successive).
In response to this Court’s Toler1 order, the State properly concedes that we must reverse and remand for the trial court to attach documents proving Appellant’s claims are successive, or to address the claims for prison and jail credit on the merits.2
REVERSED and REMANDED.
WETHERELL, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Copeland v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…rd presented to it, these attachments would not relieve the trial court of its duty to attach these same records to its order to support a finding that a motion is successive. Therefore, pursuant to this Court’s previous holding in Wright v. State, 222 So. 3d 620, 621 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017), we reverse and remand for the trial court to attach the necessary documents proving Appellant’s claims are successive. REVERSED and REMANDED. MAKAR, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not f…
-
Damion Harley v. State, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D1456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…as not attached to the trial court’s order now on appeal. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court to attach documents proving Appellant’s claims are successive, or to address the claim for jail credit on the merits. See Wright v. State, 222 So. 3d 620, 621 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (reversing and remanding to correct the same error); Copeland v. State, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D1456 (Fla. 1st DCA June 18, 2021) (same). REVERSED and REMANDED. WINOKUR, J., concurs; MAKAR, J., concurs in result with opinion.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Antoine L. McBRIDE, 848 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2003)
- Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Wright v. State, 941 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Ivory Arnold v. State, 949 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)