ZEFFERY LUNDY
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Zeffery Lundy appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for correction of jail credit, claiming he was entitled to an additional 238 days of credit for a violation of probation. The appellate court found that Lundy's motion was facially insufficient because it failed to include required allegations about whether he waived county jail credit, but disagreed with the trial court's decision to deny it on the merits without allowing amendment.
The trial court erred by denying the facially insufficient motion on its merits without granting leave to amend. The court should have stricken the motion as facially insufficient and granted the appellant sixty days to amend it to include the required allegations under Rule 3.801(c).
[1] A motion for correction of jail credit under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801 that is facially insufficient must be stricken with leave to amend within sixty days…
[2] A waiver of county jail credit must be specific, voluntary, and clear from the face of the record; a general plea form does not constitute a valid, clear waiver of jail c…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLundy filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801 motion seeking 238 additional days of jail credit. His motion lacked the required allegations r…
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 Waiver Of Jail Credit cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant Zeffery Lundy appeals the circuit court’s order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801 motion for correction of jail credit. He contends that he is entitled to an additional 238 days of credit on his sentence for violation of probation.
Absent from his motion were the required allegations on whether he waived any county jail credit at the time of the sentencing and, if so, the number of days waived. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.801(c)(5). Instead of allowing appellant leave to amend to cure this deficiency, the trial court attached appellant’s plea form and denied the motion on its merits. The court found appellant waived any claim to additional jail credit. However, a jail credit waiver must be specific, voluntary, and clear from the face of the record. See, e.g., Wolter v. State, 219 So. 3d 852, 853 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). The plea form here did not satisfy this requirement.
Because appellant’s motion was facially insufficient, the circuit court should have stricken it and given appellant leave to amend within sixty days. See, e.g., Lopez v. State, 248 So. 3d 1204, 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (citations omitted). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the circuit court to enter an order striking the motion as facially insufficient and granting appellant sixty days to amend it to provide the information specified in rule 3.801(c) and this opinion.
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
LEVINE, FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
-
Bowen v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)
-
Perez v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Wolter v. State, 219 So. 3d 852 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
- Lopez v. State, 248 So. 3d 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)