Fredrick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fredrick v. State

82 So. 3d 192, 2012 WL 833089, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4104

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 14, 2012

Docket1D11-4226

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 82 So. 3d 192 (Fredrick 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

Fredrick v. State, 82 So. 3d 192, 2012 WL 833089, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4104 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant filed a rule 3.800(a) motion arguing that the trial court improperly retained jurisdiction over half of his sentences when it had no authority to retain jurisdiction over more than a third of his sentences. The trial court denied the motion but did not attach the judgment and sentence, the transcript, or any other documents which identify the date on which the crimes took place. The date the crimes occurred is crucial because during only a brief period of time possibly pertinent to this case were trial courts authorized to retain jurisdiction over one-half of a defendant’s sentence. Compare § 947.16(3), Fla. Stat. (1981), with § 947.16(3), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1982). On remand, documents conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim should be attached to any order denying the claim or, if the appellant’s claims have merit, the trial court should grant relief.

REVERSED AND REMANDED with directions.

BENTON, C.J., WOLF, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant filed a rule 3.800(a) motion arguing that the trial court improperly retained jurisdiction over half of his sentences when it had no authority to retain jurisdiction over more than a third of his sentences. The trial court denied the motion but did not attach the judgment and sentence, the transcript, or any other documents which identify the date on which the crimes took place. The date the crimes occurred is crucial because during only a brief period of time possibly pertinent to this case were trial courts authorized to retain jurisdiction over one-half of a defendant’s sentence. Compare § 947.16(3), Fla. Stat. (1981), with § 947.16(3), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1982). On remand, documents conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim should be attached to any order denying the claim or, if the appellant’s claims have merit, the trial court should grant relief.

REVERSED AND REMANDED with directions.

BENTON, C.J., WOLF, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 So. 3d 192, 2012 WL 833089, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fredrick-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack