Haggerty v. State, 94-0120
| Decision Date | 23 February 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 94-0120,94-0120 |
| Citation | 632 So.2d 668 |
| Parties | 19 Fla. L. Weekly D410 Michael A. HAGGERTY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael A. Haggerty, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Don M. Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
In denying appellant's motion for jail time credit filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a), the trial court stated The trial court did not attach any supporting portions of the record to the order. Because we adopt the requirement on orders summarily denying relief on rule 3.800(a) motions, that the trial court must attach portions of the record sufficient to refute allegations of a facially sufficient motion to correct an illegal sentence, see Thomas v. State, 634 So.2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), we reverse and remand for further proceedings. 1 Should the trial court on remand again determine that the motion should be denied, the order of denial must be supported by portions of the record refuting the claim for additional jail time credit. See Littlejohn v. State, 616 So.2d 129 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). If the trial court determines that the files before it do not contain documentation that either refutes or substantiates appellant's claim, then the trial court may deny the motion without prejudice to appellant's right to file a sworn motion for post-conviction relief on the same ground pursuant to rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. Id. at 130, citing Thomas v. State, 611 So.2d 600 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
1 Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(g) was recently amended to allow for appeals from Rule 3.800(a) orders in the same summary fashion as is allowed from Rule 3.850. Although Rule 3.800(a) was not amended to require the same attachment of record support for the order so that the expedited review process many be accomplished, our adoption of the record requirement is essential to the simplified review under the rule as amended.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- STATE, DEPT. OF REV. v. Thurmond
-
Webb v. State, 94-31
...1994); Jones v. State, 635 So.2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Small v. State, 535 So.2d 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); see also Haggerty v. State, 632 So.2d 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Bunch v. State, 622 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Young v. State, 619 So.2d 378 (Fla. 2d DCA Accordingly, the order den......
-
Fann v. State, 93-3039
...1994); Jones v. State, 635 So.2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Small v. State, 535 So.2d 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). See also Haggerty v. State, 632 So.2d 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Bunch v. State, 622 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Young v. State, 619 So.2d 378 (Fla. 2d DCA Accordingly, the order den......
-
Holmes v. State, 95-279
...an illegal sentence it shall attach those parts of the record which clearly refute defendant's allegations. See Haggerty v. State, 632 So.2d 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). The trial court properly attached to its order those portions of the record which demonstrate that defendant waived both his ......