Brascom v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Brascom v. State

737 So. 2d 603, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9511, 1999 WL 496502

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 15, 1999

DocketNo. 98-4520

StatusPublished

This text of 737 So. 2d 603 (Brascom v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brascom v. State, 737 So. 2d 603, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9511, 1999 WL 496502 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By petition for writ of mandamus, Comer Brascom seeks an order of this court compelling the trial court to rule on a pending motion for post-conviction relief through which he seeks the award of additional credit for jail time served. In response to an order to show cause issued by this court, the state shows that the trial court has entered a third amended judgment and sentence affording Brascom additional jail credit. The state asserts that on the basis of this action, the petition for writ of mandamus should be dismissed as moot. Brascom argues in his reply, however, that the third amended judgment and sentence does not afford him the full measure of credit sought by his rule 3.850 motion, and that the trial court should be required to enter a written and appealable order on the merits of his motion. We agree, grant the petition, and direct the trial court to enter a written order within 30 days disposing of Brascom’s pending [604]*604motion. Because we are confident that the trial court will comply with this instruction, we withhold formal issuance of the writ.

BOOTH, ALLEN and BENTON, JJ„ concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

By petition for writ of mandamus, Comer Brascom seeks an order of this court compelling the trial court to rule on a pending motion for post-conviction relief through which he seeks the award of additional credit for jail time served. In response to an order to show cause issued by this court, the state shows that the trial court has entered a third amended judgment and sentence affording Brascom additional jail credit. The state asserts that on the basis of this action, the petition for writ of mandamus should be dismissed as moot. Brascom argues in his reply, however, that the third amended judgment and sentence does not afford him the full measure of credit sought by his rule 3.850 motion, and that the trial court should be required to enter a written and appealable order on the merits of his motion. We agree, grant the petition, and direct the trial court to enter a written order within 30 days disposing of Brascom’s pending [604]*604motion. Because we are confident that the trial court will comply with this instruction, we withhold formal issuance of the writ.

BOOTH, ALLEN and BENTON, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

737 So. 2d 603, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9511, 1999 WL 496502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brascom-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.