Ring v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ring v. State

537 So. 2d 209, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 291, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 299, 1989 WL 5250

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 27, 1989

DocketNo. 87-3489

StatusPublished

This text of 537 So. 2d 209 (Ring 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

Ring v. State, 537 So. 2d 209, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 291, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 299, 1989 WL 5250 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charles Ring appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct credit for jail time served. In his motion, the appellant sought credit for time that he served in the county jail prior to sentencing for violation of community control. Although technically released on his own recognizance, the jail records reflect that the appellant remained in jail on the charges which were the basis of the violation of community control. Although a previous circuit court order had determined that the appellant was entitled to jail time credit for that time period, the sentence does not reflect that credit. The trial judge denied the appellant’s motion without an evidentiary hearing, and did not attach to his order any portion of the files or records to refute appellant’s allegations.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, unless the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall order the state attorney to file an answer within a time certain. After receipt of the answer, the court shall determine whether an evi-dentiary hearing is required. If the court should again deny appellant’s motion, he has thirty days in which to appeal.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HALL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Charles Ring appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct credit for jail time served. In his motion, the appellant sought credit for time that he served in the county jail prior to sentencing for violation of community control. Although technically released on his own recognizance, the jail records reflect that the appellant remained in jail on the charges which were the basis of the violation of community control. Although a previous circuit court order had determined that the appellant was entitled to jail time credit for that time period, the sentence does not reflect that credit. The trial judge denied the appellant’s motion without an evidentiary hearing, and did not attach to his order any portion of the files or records to refute appellant’s allegations.

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, unless the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall order the state attorney to file an answer within a time certain. After receipt of the answer, the court shall determine whether an evi-dentiary hearing is required. If the court should again deny appellant’s motion, he has thirty days in which to appeal.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

HALL, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

537 So. 2d 209, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 291, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 299, 1989 WL 5250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ring-v-state-fladistctapp-1989.