Daniels v. State, No. 67357

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtOVERTON; McDONALD
Citation491 So.2d 543,11 Fla. L. Weekly 324
Parties11 Fla. L. Weekly 324 Melvin Eugene DANIELS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. 67357
Decision Date17 July 1986

Page 543

491 So.2d 543
11 Fla. L. Weekly 324
Melvin Eugene DANIELS, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 67357.
Supreme Court of Florida.
July 17, 1986.

Page 544

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, Tatjana Ostapoff, Asst. Public Defender, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Joy B. Shearer and Robert S. Jaegers, Asst. Attys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.

OVERTON, Justice.

This is a petition to review Daniels v. State, 477 So.2d 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in crediting petitioner on only one of four concurrent sentences for the time he spent in jail awaiting sentencing on multiple charges. The district court noted that its decision directly conflicts with the view of the Third District Court of Appeal. See Shepard v. State, 459 So.2d 460 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. We note that this decision also conflicts with the position of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, see Green v. State, 450 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), but is consistent with the view taken by the First and Second District Courts of Appeal. See Vasquez v. State, 478 So.2d 76 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Kinney v. State, 458 So.2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). We approve the district court's decision in this case, as well as the opinions of the First and Second District Courts on this issue.

The facts of this case reflect that on July 10, 1983, Melvin Eugene Daniels, who was on probation for trespassing, was arrested and held in jail on charges of kidnapping, burglary, and attempted sexual battery. On July 25, while Daniels was being held in jail, a warrant was issued based on Daniels' violation of probation. The state contends that, although Daniels was incarcerated on July 10 for the kidnapping, burglary, and sexual battery charges, after July 25 Daniels was held only for the probation violation. We reject this argument. Had the probation violation allegation been dismissed, there is nothing in the record to indicate that Daniels would not have remained in custody pending trial on the kidnapping, burglary, and attempted sexual battery charges. The fact that a warrant for Daniels' probation violation was executed while he was in custody on the felony charges does not mean that he was no longer in custody on those charges.

Daniels was eventually convicted on the three felony charges, and, immediately...

To continue reading

Request your trial
148 practice notes
  • Gallion v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., Case No. 3:17-cv-663-J-39MCR
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • June 21, 2019
    ...Triatik v. State, 267 So.3d 535, 537 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (finding non-entitlement to pyramided jail credit, relying on Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543, 545 (Fla. 1986)). Therefore, Petitioner is not entitled to jail credit on count four for which he received a consecutive sentence. See Ex. ......
  • Vanderblomen v. State, No. 97-2557
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • March 24, 1998
    ...postconviction claim for additional presentencing county jail time credit against his three uncredited sentences. In Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543, 545 (Fla.1986), the Florida Supreme Court held that a defendant must be given credit against each of several concurrent sentences for all pre......
  • State v. Blondin, No. 94-048
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • July 28, 1995
    ...of sentences, "crucial factor" is whether sentences are to be served concurrently or consecutively); see also Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543, 545 (Fla.1986) (accord). We realize that this holding will probably not be the final word from this Court in a complex area of the law that often re......
  • State v. Mancino, No. 90516
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • June 11, 1998
    ...v. State, 525 So.2d 901, 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (opinion on rehearing) (reading the Florida Supreme Court's opinion in Daniels[v. State, 491 So.2d 543 (Fla. 1986)] to mean that "a sentence is illegal if it fails to allow a defendant credit on all concurrent sentences for all of the time sp......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
148 cases
  • Gallion v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., Case No. 3:17-cv-663-J-39MCR
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • June 21, 2019
    ...Triatik v. State, 267 So.3d 535, 537 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (finding non-entitlement to pyramided jail credit, relying on Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543, 545 (Fla. 1986)). Therefore, Petitioner is not entitled to jail credit on count four for which he received a consecutive sentence. See Ex. ......
  • Vanderblomen v. State, No. 97-2557
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • March 24, 1998
    ...postconviction claim for additional presentencing county jail time credit against his three uncredited sentences. In Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543, 545 (Fla.1986), the Florida Supreme Court held that a defendant must be given credit against each of several concurrent sentences for all pre......
  • State v. Blondin, No. 94-048
    • United States
    • Vermont United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • July 28, 1995
    ...of sentences, "crucial factor" is whether sentences are to be served concurrently or consecutively); see also Daniels v. State, 491 So.2d 543, 545 (Fla.1986) (accord). We realize that this holding will probably not be the final word from this Court in a complex area of the law that often re......
  • State v. Mancino, No. 90516
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • June 11, 1998
    ...v. State, 525 So.2d 901, 902 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (opinion on rehearing) (reading the Florida Supreme Court's opinion in Daniels[v. State, 491 So.2d 543 (Fla. 1986)] to mean that "a sentence is illegal if it fails to allow a defendant credit on all concurrent sentences for all of the time sp......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT