CONNELL L. CARROLL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1015] PER CURIAM.
Connell L. Carroll appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand.
Carroll claimed that his sentence was illegal because the trial court awarded him only 151 days of jail credit. Carroll alleged that, in addition to the time he spent incarcerated prior to the imposition of the sentence, he should have been awarded credit for the time he served in county jail. The postconviction court only addressed the credit for time spent incarcerated prior to the trial court’s imposition of the sentence. It failed to address Carroll’s claim that he was entitled to time served in county jail as a condition of his probation. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court to reconsider Carroll’s motion. See O’Neill v. State, 861 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). If the trial court determines that summary denial is appropriate, it must set forth its rationale and attach any portions of the record that conclusively refute Carroll’s claim.
Reversed and remánded.
WHATLEY, CASANUEVA, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jere Andre Walker v. State, 940 So. 2d 1215 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…ognizable under rule 3.800(a). See Dickson v. State, 826 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Because Walker’s motion presented these two facially sufficient claims, cognizable under rule 3.800(a), the trial court must address them. See Carroll v. State, 914 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Therefore, we reverse the order on appeal and remand with instructions that the court address the merits of these two claims.1 Reversed and remanded. PLEUS, ROBERT J., JR., and GRIFFIN, JACQUELINE R., Associate Judges, concur.…
-
Clifton v. State, 930 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…urt to reconsider Clifton’s motion. On remand, if the posteonviction court summarily denies Clifton’s second claim, it must set forth its reasoning and attach any portions of the record that conclusively refute Clifton’s claim. See Carroll v. State, 914 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); O’Neill v. State, 861 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. STRINGER, SILBERMAN, and WALLACE, JJ„ Concur.…
-
Montague v. State, 933 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…-viction court to reconsider Montague’s claim. On remand, if the postconviction court summarily denies the claim, it must set forth its reasoning and attach portions of the record that conclusively refute Montague’s allegation. See Carroll v. State, 914 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); O’Neill v. State, 861 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded. DAVIS and WALLACE, JJ„ Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- O'Neill v. State, 861 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)