Colosimo v. State, 2D00-3399.
Decision Date | 20 October 2000 |
Docket Number | No. 2D00-3399.,2D00-3399. |
Citation | 775 So.2d 352 |
Parties | Kendal COLOSIMO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Kendal Colosimo appeals the summary denial of her "motion to credit time served in court ordered drug rehabilitation program" filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm because Colosimo's motion is facially insufficient under State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998), and Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). These cases hold that credit time issues are cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion when it is affirmatively alleged how and where the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief. Our affirmance is without prejudice to Colosimo filing a motion under rule 3.800(a) which meets the requirements of Mancino and Baker, or to filing a timely and legally sufficient motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Toomajan v. State, 5D01-31.
...which failed to allege court records demonstrated on face defendant's entitlement to relief was properly denied); Colosimo v. State, 775 So.2d 352 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (motion which failed to allege court records demonstrated on face entitlement to relief was facially Although the trial court......