MORRIS MONTFORD, JR., PETITIONER,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT
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.
Morris Montford sought habeas corpus relief arguing he deserved credit for time served under a void 15-year sentence toward a subsequent 12-year sentence. The Florida Supreme Court denied relief, holding that time served under sentences for unrelated offenses cannot be credited against each other, and a sentence cannot commence before its imposition.
The court held that Montford is not entitled to credit because: (1) the 15-year and 12-year sentences were for wholly unrelated offenses, and time served under one sentence cannot be credited against another for a different crime; and (2) a sentence cannot commence prior to its imposition, so time served before July 31, 1961 cannot reduce time owed under the 12-year sentence.
“The void and valid judgments were for different and wholly unrelated offenses. Time served under the first sentence is not, therefore, to be credited against the other.”
States the primary holding that sentences for unrelated offenses cannot share credit for time served
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMontford received two concurrent 15-year sentences on December 19, 1950 for armed robbery. On July 31, 1961, he received a concurrent 12-year sentence…
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 Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
Morris Montford has petitioned this court for writ of habeas corpus alleging he is entitled to credit for time served under *664void 15-year sentence for armed robbery which credit, when applied to the 12-year sentence for robbery1 he is presently serving, will warrant his release. We issued the writ and respondent has filed his return admitting the facts, as alleged by petitioner, that on December 19, 1950, petitioner received two 15-year sentences to run concurrently; that on July 31, 1961, he received a 12-year sentence to run concurrently with the former 15-year sentences and that in September of 1963 the two 15-year sentences were declared null and void.
Respondent contends: (1) the 12-year sentence cannot be considered as commenced prior to its reception; and (2) no credit can be allowed because the 15-year sentences and the 12-year sentence are for unrelated offenses and the situation is thus distinguishable from cases where credit is given upon reconviction and resentenc-ing for the same crime. We must agree with respondent’s contentions
The void and valid judgments were for different and wholly unrelated offenses. Time served under the first sentence is not, therefore, to be credited against the other. In Re Allen, 140 So.2d 640 (Fla.App.1st 1962).
Petitioner cannot have commenced serving his 12-year sentence prior to its imposition on July 31, 1961. Time he served prior to that date on the void sentence will not go to reduce the time he must serve under his present sentence. We find nothing in Vellucci v. Cochran, 138 So.2d 510 (Fla.1963) to the contrary.2
Petitioner has also alleged in subsequent correspondence with this court that he was not represented by counsel at the time of his 1961 conviction for robbery. Our disposition of the petition herein is expressly without prejudice to any rights petitioner may have to proceed under Florida Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924-Appendix. See Gideon v. Wainwright, 153 So.2d 299 (Fla.1963).
For the reasons above-stated, the writ of habeas corpus heretofore issued is discharged, the cause dismissed, and the petitioner remanded to the custody of the respondent.
It is so ordered.
DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gideon v. Louie L. Wainwright, 153 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1963)
- Helton v. Mayo, 153 Fla. 616 (Fla. 1943)
- Vellucci v. Cochran, 138 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 1962)
- In re Allen, 140 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)