Daily v. State, 99-486.
| Decision Date | 07 April 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-486.,99-486. |
| Citation | 750 So.2d 37 |
| Parties | John DAILY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John Daily, Immokalee, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and David M. Schultz, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Contrary to the conclusion reached by the lower court, the plea sheet attached to the lower court's order does not establish a specific and voluntary waiver of any jail time credit to which appellant may be entitled for time allegedly spent in the Dade County Jail on a warrant for the Palm Beach case. See Silverstein v. State, 654 So.2d 1040, 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
(). However, contrary to the pleading requirements of State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998), appellant's motion for jail time credit does not affirmatively allege that the court records demonstrate entitlement to relief. See also Toro v. State, 719 So.2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (). As such, the motion as it stands cannot be resolved as a Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. See Mancino, 714 So.2d at 433; Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.800(a). Nor can the motion properly be treated in the alternative as a motion for postconviction relief under Rule 3.850, as the motion is not under oath. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850(c) ().
Accordingly, we affirm the order denying the motion for jail time credit, but without prejudice to file either (1) a Rule 3.800 motion that affirmatively demonstrates on the face of the record entitlement to additional jail time credit or, alternatively, (2) a properly sworn Rule 3.850 motion challenging the sentence based on the failure to award jail time credit. If appellant, who was sentenced to two years imprisonment, is correct in his assertion that he is entitled to almost nine months of additional jail time credit, his legal sentence may have already expired. Accordingly, the lower court is directed to resolve expeditiously any renewed postconviction motion filed by appellant.
Clerk is directed to issue mandate concurrently with this opinion.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rogers v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
...in the record the pertinent information can be found, and (3) explain how the record entitles the defendant to relief. Daily v. State, 750 So.2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).The Defendant's claim of double jeopardy is not cognizable under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(a). "A double jeopardy argument is ......
-
Dennis v. State, 1D08-5931.
...(Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (court cannot treat rule 3.800(a) motion as rule 3.850 motion where motion is not properly sworn); Daily v. State, 750 So.2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (affirming denial of 3.800(a) motion seeking jail credit without prejudice to defendant's filing facially sufficient 3.800(......
-
Lee v. State, 4D00-351.
...and time-barred. In conformance with our decisions in Quartucci v. State, 736 So.2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), Daily v. State, 750 So.2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) and Carridine v. State, 741 So.2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), the denial, however, should have been without prejudice to Appellant to f......
-
Smith v. State, 4D01-1186.
...records reflect that Appellant is entitled to additional jail credit, award Appellant further credit as may be due. See Daily v. State, 750 So.2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Hidalgo v. State, 729 So.2d 984, 986 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1999)("..., we conclude that a defendant's jail card should be treated......