R.L. GAMMON, 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.
Richard Gammon appealed his sentences for crimes committed in 1995 and 1997, challenging the trial court's failure to award sufficient jail credit on the 1995 sentences and the inconsistency between oral and written sentencing pronouncements on a 1997 count. The court reversed and remanded, finding the trial court failed to credit time previously served and lacked jurisdiction to modify probation conditions after the notice of appeal was filed.
A trial court must credit a defendant with all time served and has no discretion to impose a sentence without such credit. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter a written probation order modifying the oral pronouncement after the notice of appeal was filed, and any such order must be quashed.
[1] A trial court has no discretion to impose a sentence without crediting a defendant with time served.
[2] An illegal sentence can be reviewed on direct appeal even if the error is not complained of in the trial court.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“[A] sentence that does not mandate credit for time served [is] illegal since a trial court has no discretion to impose a sentence without crediting a defendant with time served.”
Establishes the mandatory nature of jail credit and that trial courts lack discretion to deny it
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGammon pleaded no contest to three counts of dealing in stolen property in 1995 and was sentenced to three years' probation with eighteen months in co…
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 Jurisdiction After Notice Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Richard Louis Gammon appeals sentences stemming from offenses committed in 1995 and 1997. He claims that the trial court failed to grant him sufficient jail credit against sentences imposed for the offenses he committed in 1995. He also asserts that the written sentence on one of the 1997 counts was inconsistent with the oral pronouncement at sentencing. We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
In 1995, Mr. Gammon entered a plea of no contest to three counts of dealing in stolen property. The trial court sentenced him to three years’ probation with a special condition that he serve eighteen months in the county jail. After his release, he violated probation on grounds unrelated to this appeal. He was sentenced to one year of community control in the wake of this violation.
While on community control, Mr. Gammon was charged with committing two armed robberies with a deadly weapon. He entered a plea of no contest to the new charges, and admitted he had violated the conditions of community control. The trial court orally sentenced Mr. Gammon to 34.3 months’ incarceration for the 1995 offenses, 207 months’ incarceration on the first armed robbery count, and lifetime probation on the second armed robbery count. As to incarceration, these sentences were to run concurrently. Although the written sentence includes the sentences of incarceration and the lifetime probation, the trial court made no order setting the conditions of probation. About two months after Mr. Gammon filed his notice of appeal, however, the trial court entered an order imposing conditions of probation. This order contained conditions that were inconsistent with the conditions orally pronounced at sentencing.
The trial court granted Mr. Gammon jail credit on all of his sentences for the time spent in jail after he committed the armed robberies. But the trial court awarded him no credit for any other time spent in jail. On the sentences imposed for the offenses committed in 1995, the trial court did not allow Mr. Gammon any credit for the eighteen months he spent in jail on his original sentence. “[A] sentence that does not mandate credit for time served [is] illegal since a trial court has no discretion to impose a sentence without crediting a defendant with time served.” State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998); see Nelson v. State, 719 So. 2d 1230, 1233 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (en banc) (holding that an illegal sentence can be reviewed on direct appeal even if the error is not complained of in the trial court).
We therefore remand with directions that the trial court recalculate the amount of jail credit on the sentences for the 1995 offenses, taking into account the time he spent in jail before sentence was pronounced in the 1997 cases. If the trial court awards additional credit on the 1995 sentences, Mr. Gammon need not be present at re-sentencing.
We also quash the written order of probation. Since this order was entered after Mr. Gammon filed his notice of appeal, the trial court lacked jurisdiction. See Bauman v. State, 600 So. 2d 551, 552-53 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). On remand, the trial court shall enter an order of probation consistent with the oral pronouncement made at sentencing. See State v. Williams, 712 So. 2d 762, 764 (Fla.1998); Vincent v. State, 600 So. 2d 1292, 1293 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Shaddix v. State, 599 So. 2d 269, 270-71 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
ALLEN, LAWRENCE, and BENTON, JJ„ CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wydell Jody Evans v. State, 838 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 2002)…ully formed conscious purpose to kill” which may be “formed a moment before the act but must exist for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act.” Woods v. State, 738 So. 2d 980, 985 (Fla.1999). Premeditation can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances, including “the nature of the weapon used, the presence or absence of adequate provocation, previous difficulties between the parties, the manner in which the homicide…
-
Baker v. State, 760 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…ould not grant a motion for acquittal in a criminal case if there is any view of the evidence, which is favorable to the, state’s case, from which the jury could reasonably believe or infer facts that would prove the state’s charges. Woods v. State, 738 So. 2d 980, 985 (Fla.1999); Cox v. State, 711 So. 2d 1323 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). On appeal, the reviewing court must look at the evidence most favorable to sustain the jury’s verdict. Blair v. State, 481 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). The evidence in this case…
-
Cousnard v. State, 188 So. 3d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…r 21, 2014 (exclusive of the days he was out on bond). However, it appears this award of jail credit did not include all twelve (12) days’ credit awarded Appellant on November 4, 2013, when he was originally placed on probation. See Gammon v. State, 738 So. 2d 980, 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Young v. State, 840 So. 2d 468, 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Therefore, we reverse the denial of Appellant’s Rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, and remand to the trial court to recalculate Appellant’s credit for time served and re-sentenc…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Nelson v. State, 719 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- State v. Chuck Junior Williams, 712 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 1998)
- Shaddix v. State, 599 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Vincent v. State, 600 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Bauman v. State, 600 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)