Nash v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nash v. State

118 So. 3d 281, 2013 WL 3834049, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 11731

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 26, 2013

DocketNo. 5D13-1615

StatusPublished

This text of 118 So. 3d 281 (Nash 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

Nash v. State, 118 So. 3d 281, 2013 WL 3834049, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 11731 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the order summarily denying his rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence filed March 27, 2013, in Orange County case number 2010-CF-10164-A-O. Appellant asserts he was incarcerated in the Orange County jail from July 15, 2010 until July 19, 2010, and thus is entitled to five days’ credit for time served as opposed to the two days’ credit he was provided. In support of his claim, Appellant attached an Orange County Corrections Department “Letter of Incarceration (Body Receipt),” which is not part of the lower court record and is, therefore, hearsay. The existing record supports the trial court’s denial of relief, as acknowledged by Appellant. Because Appellant’s claim is not apparent on the face of the record, rule 3.800(a) is not available to obtain relief. Appellant’s claim must be advanced in a rule 3.850 motion since it was not presented in a rule 3.800(b) motion. Appellant has until September 12, 2013, to file a sufficient rule 3.850 motion. See Santiago v. State, 22 So.3d 789 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (stating that if claim cannot be resolved from face of record without resorting to fact-finding, defendant must file timely rule 3.850 motion). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Appellant to file his claim in a timely and legally sufficient motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

AFFIRMED without prejudice.

TORPY, C.J., ORFINGER and COHEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the order summarily denying his rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence filed March 27, 2013, in Orange County case number 2010-CF-10164-A-O. Appellant asserts he was incarcerated in the Orange County jail from July 15, 2010 until July 19, 2010, and thus is entitled to five days’ credit for time served as opposed to the two days’ credit he was provided. In support of his claim, Appellant attached an Orange County Corrections Department “Letter of Incarceration (Body Receipt),” which is not part of the lower court record and is, therefore, hearsay. The existing record supports the trial court’s denial of relief, as acknowledged by Appellant. Because Appellant’s claim is not apparent on the face of the record, rule 3.800(a) is not available to obtain relief. Appellant’s claim must be advanced in a rule 3.850 motion since it was not presented in a rule 3.800(b) motion. Appellant has until September 12, 2013, to file a sufficient rule 3.850 motion. See Santiago v. State, 22 So.3d 789 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (stating that if claim cannot be resolved from face of record without resorting to fact-finding, defendant must file timely rule 3.850 motion). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Appellant to file his claim in a timely and legally sufficient motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

AFFIRMED without prejudice.

TORPY, C.J., ORFINGER and COHEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 So. 3d 281, 2013 WL 3834049, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 11731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nash-v-state-fladistctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack