LOWELL KYLE, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed summary denial of jail credit motion, holding that defendant was entitled to credit for time served in custody between conviction and sentencing, not just pre-trial detention.
A defendant is entitled to jail credit for time spent in custody between conviction and sentencing, not merely for pre-trial detention time.
[1] A defendant is entitled to jail credit for time spent in custody between conviction and sentencing under Florida Rule 3.800(a).
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 intelligenceKyle was convicted of lewd act upon a child on March 30, 1999, and sentenced on April 27, 1999 to 170.2 months. He received 52 days of jail credit fro…
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 Sentencing Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, J.
Lowell Kyle appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.800(a) motion for jail credit. We reverse.
On 30 March 1999, Kyle was convicted in Orange County of a lewd act upon a child. On 27 April 1999, he was sentenced to 170.2 months incarceration, with credit for 52 days time served. Kyle has two theories to support his argument for additional jail credit. First, he argues that he should have been given credit for time he spent in custody in another state. Out-of-state jail credit is discretionary, with the primary consideration being whether a defendant was held in custody in another state solely on Florida charges. See Kronz v. State, 462 So. 2d 450 (Fla.1985). We conclude Kyle is not entitled to out-of-state jail credit because he did not allege that he was held in another state solely because of the Florida charge. See Dewitt v. State, 818 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Kyle’s second theory, which the state does not contest, is that he was not given credit for the time he was held in the Orange County jail. Kyle received 52 days of jail credit, measured from the date of his arrest on 17 September 1998 to his release on a bond on 7 November 1998. After Kyle was adjudicated guilty, he was remanded to custody on 30 March 1999, and sentenced on 27 April 1999. Kyle did not receive credit for this time that he was held in custody after his conviction but prior to his sentencing.
We REVERSE and REMAND with directions that Kyle be given credit of 79 days instead of 52 days.
PLEUS and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gomez v. State, 984 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…. Krause v. State, 857 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Riscaldino v. State, 932 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Courts have required these motions to allege that the movant was held in the other state solely on the Florida charge. See Kyle v. State, 878 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Gomez’s motion did not allege that he was held in Pennsylvania solely on the Florida charge, and a defendant is not entitled to credit for time jailed in another state on charges unrelated to the Florida offense. Tribble v. Stat…
Authorities Cited
- Kronz v. State, 462 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1985)
- Dewitt v. State, 818 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)