Holly v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Holly v. State

576 So. 2d 948, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2661, 1991 WL 41976

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 29, 1991

DocketNo. 91-00399

StatusPublished

This text of 576 So. 2d 948 (Holly 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

Holly v. State, 576 So. 2d 948, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2661, 1991 WL 41976 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of an order that denied his motion to allow jail time credit. In the motion, appellant alleged that he was incarcerated in the Hillsborough County jail from November 21,1989, to March 1, 1990, and was entitled to 101 days credit for this jail time against his sentences in three separate cases. The trial court denied the motion and attached to its order the judgments and sentences in each case. These attachments do not conclusively refute appellant’s allegation that he was incarcerated in the county jail on November 21, 1989, for the charges and remained there prior to sentencing.

Accordingly, we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, unless the case files and records conclusively show that appellant is not entitled to relief, the trial court shall order the state to file an answer. After receipt of the answer, the trial court shall determine whether an evi-dentiary hearing is required. If the trial court should summarily deny the motion again, it shall attach such portions of the record which conclusively refute appellant’s allegations. Any party aggrieved by the subsequent action of the trial court must file a notice of appeal within thirty days to obtain appellate review.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and LEHAN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of an order that denied his motion to allow jail time credit. In the motion, appellant alleged that he was incarcerated in the Hillsborough County jail from November 21,1989, to March 1, 1990, and was entitled to 101 days credit for this jail time against his sentences in three separate cases. The trial court denied the motion and attached to its order the judgments and sentences in each case. These attachments do not conclusively refute appellant’s allegation that he was incarcerated in the county jail on November 21, 1989, for the charges and remained there prior to sentencing.

Accordingly, we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, unless the case files and records conclusively show that appellant is not entitled to relief, the trial court shall order the state to file an answer. After receipt of the answer, the trial court shall determine whether an evi-dentiary hearing is required. If the trial court should summarily deny the motion again, it shall attach such portions of the record which conclusively refute appellant’s allegations. Any party aggrieved by the subsequent action of the trial court must file a notice of appeal within thirty days to obtain appellate review.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and LEHAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

576 So. 2d 948, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2661, 1991 WL 41976, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holly-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.