Layman v. State, No. 2D00-4728.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtBLUE and FULMER, JJ., concur.
Citation787 So.2d 44
PartiesShamus D. LAYMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Decision Date21 February 2001
Docket NumberNo. 2D00-4728.

787 So.2d 44

Shamus D. LAYMAN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2D00-4728.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 21, 2001.


787 So.2d 45
PATTERSON, Chief Judge.

Shamus Layman appeals from the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand for Layman to receive prison credit for time previously served.

Layman originally entered a nolo contendere plea to burglary, grand theft, and possession of burglary tools. On July 31, 1998, the trial court imposed a concurrent sentence of two years in the Department of Corrections (DOC) as a youthful offender, to be followed by two years' probation.

Upon a violation of probation, the trial court sentenced Layman to 42.75 months in DOC custody. The sentence awards Layman 101 days of jail credit, but does not award prison credit (the prison credit provision on the form is not checked).

Upon sentencing for a violation of probation, the trial court's failure to properly credit the defendant for prior prison time served is an issue which the defendant may raise in a motion to correct illegal sentence. See Burnett v. State, 745 So.2d 1043 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Griffith v. State, 706 So.2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Here, Layman's sentence upon violation of probation does not grant him credit for time previously served in the DOC on these same charges. Upon violating the probationary portion of a split sentence, the defendant is entitled to credit for time served on the incarcerative portion. See Singletary v. Slay, 688 So.2d 319 (Fla. 1997); Steele v. State 733 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Thus, we reverse the denial of Layman's motion and remand for the trial court to check the prison credit provision on Layman's sentence so that, in addition to the 101 days of jail credit, he receives prison credit for all time he previously served in the DOC on these charges prior to resentencing.

Reversed and remanded.

BLUE and FULMER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 practice notes
  • Petscher v. State, No. 5D05-3319.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 23, 2006
    ...always entitled to prison credit previously served upon violating the probationary portion of a split sentence.") (citing Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)); see also Lewis, 894 So.2d at 1086 ("As the State concedes, appellant should have been granted prison credit on the......
  • Haines v. State, No. 1D03-0814.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 31, 2003
    ...entitled to prison credit for time previously served when they violate the probationary portion of a split sentence. See Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Appellant's claim to 987 days of prison credit, pursuant to Tripp v. State, 622 So.2d 941 (Fla.1993), for each offen......
  • Fettler v. State, No. 1D03-5446.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • October 15, 2004
    ...the probationary portion of a split sentence." Atkinson v. State, 860 So.2d 982, 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (citing Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)). Furthermore, when probation is revoked after a defendant has been sentenced to a period of incarceration followed by a peri......
  • Amos v. State, No. 2D01-1044.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 5, 2001
    ...resentenced to prison on the violation of probation. This claim is cognizable in a motion to correct illegal sentence. Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). In the present case, in the order on appeal, the trial court found that "[p]rison credit is not proper in the defendant's ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • Petscher v. State, No. 5D05-3319.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 23, 2006
    ...always entitled to prison credit previously served upon violating the probationary portion of a split sentence.") (citing Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)); see also Lewis, 894 So.2d at 1086 ("As the State concedes, appellant should have been granted prison credit on the......
  • Haines v. State, No. 1D03-0814.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • July 31, 2003
    ...entitled to prison credit for time previously served when they violate the probationary portion of a split sentence. See Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Appellant's claim to 987 days of prison credit, pursuant to Tripp v. State, 622 So.2d 941 (Fla.1993), for each offen......
  • Fettler v. State, No. 1D03-5446.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • October 15, 2004
    ...the probationary portion of a split sentence." Atkinson v. State, 860 So.2d 982, 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (citing Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)). Furthermore, when probation is revoked after a defendant has been sentenced to a period of incarceration followed by a peri......
  • Amos v. State, No. 2D01-1044.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 5, 2001
    ...resentenced to prison on the violation of probation. This claim is cognizable in a motion to correct illegal sentence. Layman v. State, 787 So.2d 44 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). In the present case, in the order on appeal, the trial court found that "[p]rison credit is not proper in the defendant's ......
  • 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