McAllister v. State, 5D02-3747.
| Decision Date | 28 March 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 5D02-3747.,5D02-3747. |
| Citation | 840 So.2d 1163 |
| Parties | George Edmund McALLISTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
George Edmund McAllister, Sneads, pro se.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee and Rebecca Roark Wall, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
George Edmund McAllister (defendant) appeals the trial court's order denying his rule 3.800(a) motion, in which he asserted he was entitled to receive additional jail time credit for the time he spent incarcerated prior to sentencing on his violation of probation. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a). We affirm. The trial court, in a form order, denied the defendant's motion with a notation "previously denied." However, the court order contains no attachments of any prior orders or other documents supporting the determination that the defendant's motion was previously denied or otherwise refuting the defendant's claim. The denial of a rule 3.800(a) motion as successive must include an attachment of the prior motion and order. See Lewis v. State, 730 So.2d 823 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
. On the other hand, the defendant's motion is facially insufficient because it fails to allege that the record on its face demonstrates an entitlement to relief. See State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998); Toomajan v. State, 785 So.2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
Accordingly, the trial court's denial of the defendant's rule 3.800(a) motion is affirmed, but without prejudice to the defendant filing a facially sufficient motion.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
White v. State, 5D03-952.
...274 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), nor has he demonstrated entitlement to credit for his time spent in Seminole County Jail, McAllister v. State, 840 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). However, the State concedes that the trial court made a mathematical error in computing the award. Accordingly, we reve......
-
Sutton v. State
...ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SUAREZ and LAGOA, JJ.PER CURIAM.Affirmed. State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla. 1998) ; McAllister v. State, 840 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). ...
- OCER v. State, 5D03-2.
-
Rose v. State, 5D04-716.
...the trial court again deny the motion as successive, the court must attach copies of the prior motion and order. See McAllister v. State, 840 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). AFFIRMED without SAWAYA, C.J., and TORPY, J., concur. ...
-
Re-examining the presumption in favor of arbitration in complex commercial cases.
...exceeded their powers ..." Therefore, federal law on vacatur is persuasive in state court proceedings. See, e.g., Carter v. Lake County, 840 So. 2d 1163, 1167 (Fla. 6th D.C.A. 2003) ("[f]ederal case law which construes a federal rule after which a Florida rule is patterned may be considered......