ROBERT JOSEPH LARSON, 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 held that a sentence must explicitly specify the period of jail time credit given to the defendant.
Appellant sought credit for time spent in county jail prior to sentencing. The trial court denied the motion, stating it had considered the jail time …
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 Modification Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a sentence of appellant to eight years in the state prison. The sentence was arrived at through plea bargaining and was the sentence recommended by the state. Appellant filed a motion to correct the sentence to give appellant credit thereon for the time he had spent in the county jail prior to imposition of the sentence. The trial court denied the motion stating that at the time he sentenced appellant to eight years, he took into consideration in the sentence the time appellant had served in jail.
Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes, provides in part as follows:
“ . . . [T]he court imposing a sentence shall allow a defendant credit for all of the time he spent in the county jail before sentence. The credit must he for a specified period of time and shall be provided for in the sentence.”
Under this statute, the sentence should have stated that specified period of time for which credit was being given for jail time prior to sentence.
Reversed and remanded with directions to modify the sentence by specifying the number of days for which appellant is given credit on the eight year sentence for time spent in jail prior to sentence. Such may be done by order modifying sentence rather than re-sentencing appellant in open court.
RAWLS, C. J., McCORD and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hurst v. State, 379 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…ence, but recited: “Time served in jail already considered.” Ordinarily we would remand with directions to modify the sentence by specifying the number of days credited, and providing that Hurst need not be present for resentencing, Larson v. State, 301 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Kirkland v. State, 357 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). This casé is complicated by the pendency here of Hurst’s appeal from the judgment and sentence, which was pending also when Hurst submitted his Rule 3.850 motion to the tria…
-
Simari v. State, 309 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)…is corrective in nature and will be less than that already pronounced, the presence of appellant before the trial court is not required. Such may be done by order modifying sentence rather than resentencing appellant in open court. Larson v. State, 301 So. 2d 491 (Fla.App. 1st, 1974). Reversed and remanded for correction of sentence. JOHNSON, Acting C. J., and BOYER and MILLS, JJ., concur.…