DEWAYNE LEE BRUNER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Appellate court affirmed denial of sentence correction motion but remanded for trial court to determine whether jail time credit was properly applied to defendant's St. John's County sentence.
A defendant held on multiple charges is not entitled to multiple jail time credits, but is entitled to credit for time served on the charge prompting probation revocation, which must be applied to one sentence.
[1] A defendant held on multiple charges is not entitled to multiple jail time credits, but credit for time served on the charge prompting probation revocation must be applie…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBruner appealed the denial of his motion to correct sentence, claiming he was entitled to additional jail time credit for the period he was held on th…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Correct Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Bruner appeals the denial of his motion to correct sentence contending he is entitled to additional jail time credit pursuant to the principles enunciated in Voulo v. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 58 (Fla.1974) and Gordon v. State, 379 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). These cases indicate that a defendant is entitled to jail time credit for the period of time he was held on the charge which prompted the revocation of his probation.
However, it is well settled that a defendant, being held on numerous charges, is not entitled to a multiple credit. Miller v. State, 297 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Watson v. State, 340 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976), cert. denied 348 So. 2d 955 (Fla.1977); Radley v. State, 372 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). We are unable to determine from the record whether Bruner received the jail time credit against the St. John’s County sentence.
Accordingly, the cause is remanded to the trial court to determine if credit was applied to Bruner’s St. John’s County sentence. If not, such credit shall be applied to the present sentence, and the trial court may enter an order amending the sentence. Bruner need not be present for this purpose. The order appealed is affirmed, but the cause is remanded with directions.
SHAW and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Eric D. Bank v. State, 632 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…pursuant to a warrant. Moreover, unless concurrent sentences are involved, a defendant held on multiple charges arising from different jurisdictions is not entitled to overlapping credit. Daniels v. State, 491 So. 2d 543 (Fla.1986); Burner v. State, 398 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Bank has not demonstrated that the time he spent in custody outside Polk County was attributable solely to the charges from that county. We therefore affirm the circuit court’s denial of this portion of Bank’s motion. We do be…
-
Thompson v. Louie L. Wainwright, 447 So. 2d 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…original charge once his probation or parole is revoked and credit for time served on the charge which prompted the revocation. Voulo v. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 58 (Fla.1974); Gordon v. State, 379 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). See Bruner v. State, 398 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Although the attempted murder charge did not prompt the revocation of appellant’s probation, a defendant is entitled to all jail time served on warrants charging violation of probation. Calhoun v. State, 403 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 1s…
-
Scott v. State, 439 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…der Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 without the necessity of the presence of defendant. Such instances usually involve mechanical recalculations of credit time. See Williamson v. United States, 265 F. 2d 236 (5th Cir.1959); Bruner v. State, 398 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) and Matthews v. State, 408 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). We also note that under federal practice a defendant’s presence is not required at a reduction of his sentence under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 43(c)(4). Since i…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Winston v. State, 297 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
- Miller v. State, 297 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Voulo v. Louie L. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 1974)
- Joyner v. Karsner, 379 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Gordon v. State, 379 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Watson v. State, 340 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Radley v. State, 372 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)