DONNY ROSS, 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 affirmed denial of postconviction relief motion for jail-time credit because appellant failed to allege that court records on their face demonstrated entitlement to the credit.
A Rule 3.800(a) motion for jail-time credit is facially insufficient when the movant relies on extraneous evidence outside the court record rather than alleging that the court records themselves demonstrate entitlement to relief.
[1] A prisoner seeking jail-time credit under Rule 3.800(a) must allege that the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to the credit, not rely on extraneous…
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 intelligenceDonny Ross filed a postconviction motion seeking 82 days of jail-time credit for time served in county jail prior to sentencing, suggesting that Escam…
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 Facial Sufficiency cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant Donny Ross appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The appellant alleges that he is entitled to additional credit for 82 days served in county jail prior to sentencing. Appellant does not, however, affirmatively allege “that the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to ... relief....” Fla. R.App. P. 3.800(a). Although jail-time credit is available under a Rule 3.800(a) proceeding, the prisoner “must demonstrate that the record shows an entitlement to additional jail credit....” Williams v. State, 4 So.3d 728 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009).
Here, appellant, in his quite straightforward motion, suggests that the records of the Escambia County Jail will show a period of his incarceration at that facility until he was transferred to the Florida Department of Corrections to begin serving the present sentence. We decline to read this as an allegation that the court records will demonstrate on their face entitlement to relief, due to our concern that appellant appears to be pointing toward extraneous evidence, not part of the court record. Accordingly, we conclude that the motion is facially insufficient.
AFFIRMED.
DAVIS and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marolf v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 172 So. 3d 450 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…as the actual means by which an offense was committed or attempted, it is not an “instrumentality” and therefore not a “contraband article” subject to forfeiture under section 932.701(2)(a)(5). See Carbajal v. Forfeiture of U.S. Currency $75,781.00, 36 So. 3d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Sheriff of Seminole Cnty. v. Oliver, 59 So. 3d 232 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). While this argument may have merit as far as it goes, it is ultimately unavailing, given the allegations of Count II of the Complaint and the evidence presen…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 4 So. 3d 728 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)