Mayberry v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mayberry v. State

685 So. 2d 1326, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2018, 1996 WL 93690

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 6, 1996

DocketNo. 95-04879

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 685 So. 2d 1326 (Mayberry 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

Mayberry v. State, 685 So. 2d 1326, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2018, 1996 WL 93690 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Betty Mayberry challenges the denial of her postconviction motion which alleges that she is entitled to release and that the Department of Corrections has erred in calculating her time served in prison, earned gain-time, jail time awaiting revocation of control release, and jail time awaiting her transfer back to the custody of the Department of Corrections based upon that revocation. She incorporates these, as well as time spent in jail awaiting trial on the charge for which she is confined, in a list of credits which purport to show that her release date has since passed. She fails to specify with any precision which of these entitlements has not been properly credited toward her sentence.

The trial court properly denied her motion. At the time of sentencing she was credited with 186 days jail time credit, and in her motion she asserts a claim for only forty-eight days. The balance of her allegations concern calculations for which the Department of Corrections is responsible. Relief to prisoners alleging deprivation of deserved gain-time is afforded by petition for writ of mandamus (or writ of habeas corpus if immediate release is alleged) in the circuit court in the county in which the prisoner is housed. Newsome v. Singletary, 637 So.2d 9 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

The trial court is affirmed without prejudice for the appellant to pursue alternate, appropriate remedies.

PARKER, Á.C.J., and PATTERSON and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Betty Mayberry challenges the denial of her postconviction motion which alleges that she is entitled to release and that the Department of Corrections has erred in calculating her time served in prison, earned gain-time, jail time awaiting revocation of control release, and jail time awaiting her transfer back to the custody of the Department of Corrections based upon that revocation. She incorporates these, as well as time spent in jail awaiting trial on the charge for which she is confined, in a list of credits which purport to show that her release date has since passed. She fails to specify with any precision which of these entitlements has not been properly credited toward her sentence.

The trial court properly denied her motion. At the time of sentencing she was credited with 186 days jail time credit, and in her motion she asserts a claim for only forty-eight days. The balance of her allegations concern calculations for which the Department of Corrections is responsible. Relief to prisoners alleging deprivation of deserved gain-time is afforded by petition for writ of mandamus (or writ of habeas corpus if immediate release is alleged) in the circuit court in the county in which the prisoner is housed. Newsome v. Singletary, 637 So.2d 9 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).

The trial court is affirmed without prejudice for the appellant to pursue alternate, appropriate remedies.

PARKER, Á.C.J., and PATTERSON and BLUE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

685 So. 2d 1326, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2018, 1996 WL 93690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayberry-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack