Slay v. Singletary, No. 95-2026

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
Citation676 So.2d 456
Docket NumberNo. 95-2026
Decision Date28 May 1996
Parties21 Fla. L. Weekly D1282, 21 Fla. L. Weekly D1378 Genorval SLAY, Appellant, v. Harry K. SINGLETARY, Jr., Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Appellee.

Page 456

676 So.2d 456
21 Fla. L. Weekly D1282, 21 Fla. L. Weekly D1378
Genorval SLAY, Appellant,
v.
Harry K. SINGLETARY, Jr., Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Appellee.
No. 95-2026.
District Court of Appeal of Florida,
First District.
May 28, 1996.

Genorval Slay, pro se.

Louis A. Vargas, General Counsel, and LeeAnn Knowles, Assistant General Counsel, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for appellee.

BEFORE THE GENERAL DIVISION EN BANC

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING, REHEARING EN BANC OR FOR CERTIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

We grant appellee's motion for rehearing en banc, and upon consideration by the judges of the General Division in accordance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.331(b), we withdraw the panel's prior opinion in this cause, substitute the following in its stead, and certify the question to the Florida Supreme Court.

Genorval Slay, a/k/a Alton M. Johnson, seeks review of an order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus, in which he alleged that in calculating the length of what at the time was believed to be his controlling sentence, appellee failed to allow him credit for gain-time earned during the service of the incarcerative portion of his original split sentence, as required by State v. Green, 547 So.2d 925 (Fla.1989). Before the trial court and in its brief filed in this proceeding, appellee acknowledged that in accordance with Green, appellant is entitled to certain credit for gain-time earned during the service of his original sentence, and that the application of such credit would result in appellant's release from custody. 1 Appellee argued, however, that the language utilized by the sentencing court in its written judgment and sentence was insufficient to effect an award of that credit, and in accordance with Wilson v. State, 603 So.2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), the Department of Corrections lacks authority to correct or modify an illegal sentence. Thus, while appellee conceded appellant's entitlement to credit and his consequent entitlement

Page 457

to release, it argued that the trial court properly found that appellant must seek redress in the sentencing court, rather than through a petition for writ of habeas corpus.

However, after seeking rehearing of the panel's prior opinion reversing the trial court's order and remanding with directions to grant the writ, appellee filed a pleading indicating, without meaningful explanation, that contrary to all its prior representations, the granting of relief with respect to the claim raised by Slay would not entitle him to release, as he is presently serving a separate concurrent sentence with a tentative release date of August 6, 1996. In view of this representation, we vacate the trial court's order denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.

We agree with the general proposition, as acknowledged in Wilson, that the Department of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 practice notes
  • Childers v. State, No. 1D03-2154.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 28, 2006
    ...258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision on rehearing released after publication and withdrawal of panel decision); Slay v. Singletary, 676 So.2d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision released by general division after publication and withdrawal of panel decision), approved by 688 So.2......
  • Childers v. State, No. 1D03-2154.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 28, 2006
    ...258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision on rehearing released after publication and withdrawal of panel decision); Slay v. Singletary, 676 So.2d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision released by general division after publication and withdrawal of panel decision), approved by 688 So.2......
  • Grant v. Powell, Case No. 5:19-cv-45-TKW/MJF
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Florida
    • December 17, 2019
    ...1235, 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), approved and remanded, 789 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2001) (citing Art. II, § 3, Fla. Const.; Slay v. Singletary, 676 So. 2d 456, 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) ("[The Department] lacks the authority to correct an illegal sentence or render the illegality harmless."); Wilson......
  • Pearson v. Moore, No. 1D99-2520.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 14, 2000
    ...branch, DOC lacks the power to adjudicate the legality of a sentence or to add or delete sentencing conditions. See Slay v. Singletary, 676 So.2d 456, 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) ("[DOC] lacks the authority to correct an illegal sentence or render the illegality harmless."); Wilson, 603 So.2d a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
17 cases
  • Childers v. State, No. 1D03-2154.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 28, 2006
    ...258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision on rehearing released after publication and withdrawal of panel decision); Slay v. Singletary, 676 So.2d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision released by general division after publication and withdrawal of panel decision), approved by 688 So.2......
  • Childers v. State, No. 1D03-2154.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 28, 2006
    ...258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision on rehearing released after publication and withdrawal of panel decision); Slay v. Singletary, 676 So.2d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (en banc decision released by general division after publication and withdrawal of panel decision), approved by 688 So.2......
  • Grant v. Powell, Case No. 5:19-cv-45-TKW/MJF
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Florida
    • December 17, 2019
    ...1235, 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), approved and remanded, 789 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2001) (citing Art. II, § 3, Fla. Const.; Slay v. Singletary, 676 So. 2d 456, 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) ("[The Department] lacks the authority to correct an illegal sentence or render the illegality harmless."); Wilson......
  • Pearson v. Moore, No. 1D99-2520.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 14, 2000
    ...branch, DOC lacks the power to adjudicate the legality of a sentence or to add or delete sentencing conditions. See Slay v. Singletary, 676 So.2d 456, 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) ("[DOC] lacks the authority to correct an illegal sentence or render the illegality harmless."); Wilson, 603 So.2d a......
  • 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