Richie v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Richie v. State

469 So. 2d 218, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1289, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14216

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 24, 1985

DocketNo. BE-186

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 469 So. 2d 218 (Richie 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

Richie v. State, 469 So. 2d 218, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1289, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14216 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

WIGGINTON, Judge.

Appellant appeals an order entered by the trial court correcting jail time credit. The order was entered pursuant to appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion in which she asserted that in a June 11, 1984, judgment of conviction and sentence, she was not given proper credit for time previously served in jail. We affirm.

In an attachment to her motion, appellant set forth the dates and total days in jail for which she contended she should have been given credit. She sought credit for 179 days served in jail. However, her attachment shows that she sought credit for time served through June 14, 1984, while her own motion shows that the date of the judgment from which she sought relief is June 11, 1984, thus indicating that her actual sentence began on that date. Pursuant to her motion, the trial judge entered the order correcting jail time credit, allowing her 176 days' credit. The three-day discrepancy between the days’ credit given by the trial judge and the days sought by appellant thus appears to be due to appellant’s error in calculating her time previously served through June 14 instead of through June 11. Consequently, the record before us indicates that the trial judge was correct in the number of days’ credit he awarded.

Appellant also sought credit for forty-four days spent in Florida State Hospital, which the trial judge did not allow. Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes, does not require that credit be given for time served in a state hospital since state hospitals are not jails. Pennington v. State, 398 So.2d 815 (Fla.1981). Therefore, the trial judge did not err in this regard.

AFFIRMED.

BOOTH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

WIGGINTON, Judge.

Appellant appeals an order entered by the trial court correcting jail time credit. The order was entered pursuant to appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion in which she asserted that in a June 11, 1984, judgment of conviction and sentence, she was not given proper credit for time previously served in jail. We affirm.

In an attachment to her motion, appellant set forth the dates and total days in jail for which she contended she should have been given credit. She sought credit for 179 days served in jail. However, her attachment shows that she sought credit for time served through June 14, 1984, while her own motion shows that the date of the judgment from which she sought relief is June 11, 1984, thus indicating that her actual sentence began on that date. Pursuant to her motion, the trial judge entered the order correcting jail time credit, allowing her 176 days' credit. The three-day discrepancy between the days’ credit given by the trial judge and the days sought by appellant thus appears to be due to appellant’s error in calculating her time previously served through June 14 instead of through June 11. Consequently, the record before us indicates that the trial judge was correct in the number of days’ credit he awarded.

Appellant also sought credit for forty-four days spent in Florida State Hospital, which the trial judge did not allow. Section 921.161(1), Florida Statutes, does not require that credit be given for time served in a state hospital since state hospitals are not jails. Pennington v. State, 398 So.2d 815 (Fla.1981). Therefore, the trial judge did not err in this regard.

AFFIRMED.

BOOTH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

469 So. 2d 218, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1289, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richie-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack