Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
John Clark DANIELS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
John Clark Daniels appeals the summary denial of his motion to define and clarify sentence filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand with instructions.
Daniels alleges that he is entitled to 347 days' jail credit in circuit court cases 01-04946-CFAWS, 02-02300-CFAWS, 02-03807-CFAWS, and 02-03748-CFAWS, thereby making the sentences coterminous. The postconviction court denied the motion on the merits. We reverse the postconviction court's order because Daniels' motion is facially insufficient. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a); see also Stathas v. State, 852 So.2d 881, 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (holding that petitioner's claim that he was entitled to jail time credit was facially insufficient where petitioner failed to allege that court records demonstrated his entitlement to additional jail credit).
Even if Daniels' motion was facially sufficient, the postconviction court failed to attach any record documents to support its findings. “The burden is on the postconviction court to attach portions of the record refuting the rule 3.800(a) claim.” Spears v. State, 920 So.2d 187, 187 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Therefore, we reverse the order denying the rule 3.800(a) motion and remand for entry of an order of dismissal without prejudice to any right Daniels may have to file a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion or a timely facially sufficient rule 3.850 motion. Such motion shall not be considered successive.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
KELLY, Judge.
SALCINES and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 2D06-1236.
Decided: December 29, 2006
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)