LEO JONES, 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 the Uniform Commitment to Custody of Division of Corrections was erroneous for failing to reflect the jail time credit awarded in the circuit court minute book.
Appellant pleaded guilty to grand larceny and was sentenced to three years with 85 days credit for jail time served, as reflected in the circuit court…
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 Jail Time Served cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of grand larceny. The circuit court minute book reflects the judgment and sentence of the court that appellant be committed to the custody of the Director of the Department of Offender Rehabilitation of the State of Florida for a period of three years. The minute book further reflects that the appellant was to be given 85 days credit for jail time served in the county jail of Bay County, Florida.
The “Uniform Commitment to Custody of Division of Corrections” reflects that the sentence imposed for the aforementioned offense was three years, without reference to any credit for jail time. The Uniform Commitment to Custody of Division of Corrections is erroneous in that it purports to deprive appellant of the 85 days jail time required under F.S. 921.161. This case is analogous to Duncan v. State, 354 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Therefore, the judgment and sentence, as reflected in the circuit court minute book are affirmed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court to correct the erroneous sentence which is reflected in the Uniform Commitment to Custody of Division of Corrections. Appellant need not be present for that purpose.
McCORD, C. J., and BOYER and MELVIN, JJ., concur.