JARVIS CRAWFORD, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Crawford appeals the summary denial of his motion for credit for time served in two armed robbery cases. The trial court left blank the space indicating credit for time served despite sentencing Crawford as a habitual felony offender. The appellate court reversed, holding that the record did not conclusively refute Crawford's claim and requiring the trial court to either grant relief or provide written portions of the record conclusively establishing he was not entitled to the credit.
The court reversed the summary denial because the post-conviction record did not conclusively refute Crawford's allegation that he did not receive the correct credit for time served. On remand, the trial court must either grant the motion or attach written portions of the record conclusively refuting Crawford's claim.
[1] A motion to correct an illegal sentence is the proper procedural vehicle to challenge a trial court's award of jail credit.
[2] A defendant is entitled to credit against a sentence for time spent in jail solely for the offense that led to that sentence.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Although the State claims that Crawford has received all the credit for time served to which he was entitled, nothing in the record before us reflects this.”
Establishes that the State's assertion was not supported by the record, requiring reversal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCrawford pleaded guilty to armed robbery with a firearm and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in case no. 06-22516, receiving five years in…
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 Habitual Felony Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
Jarvis Crawford appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). In case no. 06-22516, on February 2, 1010, Crawford entered a plea of guilty to armed robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. On the same day, Crawford was sentenced to five years in prison, followed by seven years probation and two years community control. Crawford was sentenced as a habitual felony offender. He received 1303 days of credit for time served.
In case no. 06-25355, also on February 2, 2010, Crawford entered a plea of guilty to two counts of armed robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon and attempted armed robbery. On the same day, Crawford was sentenced to five years in prison on all three counts, to be served concurrently with the sentences imposed in case no. 06-22516. This prison sentence was followed by seven years probation and two years community control. Crawford was sentenced as a habitual felony offender.
The State claims that the sentence indicated that Crawford would be allowed a total of the specified time as credit for time served prior to the imposition of the sentence, but that the space provided to indicate the amount of credit for time served was left blank.
Crawford then filed his 3.800(a) motion for credit for time served, in which he claims that he is entitled to 1281 days credit for time served. The trial court summarily denied the motion. Crawford then filed this appeal.
Although the State claims that Crawford has received all the credit for time served to which he was entitled, nothing in the record before us reflects this. The post-conviction record before us does not conclusively refute Crawford’s allegation that he did not receive the correct credit for time served.
Accordingly, we reverse the summary denial of Crawford’s 3.800(a) motion. On remand, if the trial court again enters an order summarily denying the motion, the trial court shall attach written portions of the record conclusively refuting Crawford’s claim. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D) (requiring reversal by this Court unless the record shows conclusively that the defendant is entitled to no relief).
Reversed and remanded.