Coleman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Coleman v. State

326 So. 2d 217, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14288

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 4, 1976

DocketNo. 74-779

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 326 So. 2d 217 (Coleman 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

Coleman v. State, 326 So. 2d 217, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14288 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only point on appeal which merits consideration is appellant’s contention that he should have been given credit for the time he spent in jail prior to his resentenc-ing pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 921.161 (1973). While it is difficult to see how this would be of any benefit to a person receiving a life sentence, on the off chance that jail time credit might have some effect on his right to parole, the case is remanded with directions to modify the sentence to give appellant the appropriate credit. The presence of the appellant will not be required for this purpose. Simari v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 1975, 309 So.2d 183. In all other respects, the judgment and sentence are

Affirmed.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The only point on appeal which merits consideration is appellant’s contention that he should have been given credit for the time he spent in jail prior to his resentenc-ing pursuant to Fla.Stat. § 921.161 (1973). While it is difficult to see how this would be of any benefit to a person receiving a life sentence, on the off chance that jail time credit might have some effect on his right to parole, the case is remanded with directions to modify the sentence to give appellant the appropriate credit. The presence of the appellant will not be required for this purpose. Simari v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 1975, 309 So.2d 183. In all other respects, the judgment and sentence are

Affirmed.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

326 So. 2d 217, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14288, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-state-fladistctapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack