WELLS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A pro se motion for jail credit filed by a defendant represented by counsel must be stricken as a nullity rather than considered on the merits.
[1] A pro se motion filed by a defendant represented by counsel must be stricken as a nullity and may not be considered on the merits.
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“The motion should have been stricken as a nullity.”
Court's explanation of the proper procedural treatment of a pro se motion filed by a represented defendant.
Marvin Wells, represented by trial counsel, filed a pro se motion in January 2024 seeking 411 additional days of jail credit. The trial court initiall…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.801 cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Pat Siracusa, Judge.
Marvin Wells, pro se.
PER CURIAM.
Marvin Wells appeals the order summarily denying his motion for jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801. We reverse and remand for the postconviction court to strike the motion.
In January 2024, Mr. Wells filed a pro se motion seeking an additional 411 days of jail credit. The court entered an order striking the motion with leave to amend finding the motion failed to meet the requirements of rule 3.801. Mr. Wells filed an amended motion, and the court ordered the State to respond. Relying on the State's response, the court summarily denied the motion on the merits. Mr. Wells was represented by trial counsel when he filed his pro se motion for jail credit. See Fla. R. Crim. Pro. 3.111(e)(1), (3). The motion should have been stricken as a nullity. See Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472, 475-76 (Fla. 2003).
Reversed and remanded.
SLEET, C.J., and SILBERMAN and LABRIT, JJ., Concur
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
2