Rodgers v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rodgers v. State

580 So. 2d 661, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5552, 1991 WL 101826

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 12, 1991

DocketNo. 91-01452

StatusPublished

This text of 580 So. 2d 661 (Rodgers 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

Rodgers v. State, 580 So. 2d 661, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5552, 1991 WL 101826 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Winston Rodgers appeals the summary denial of his motion seeking presentence jail time credit. The trial court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing, finding that appellant had filed a prior similar motion, which previously had been denied. Although the trial court noted in the order that portions of the record refuting appellant's allegations were attached to the prior order of denial, the court failed to attach either the prior motion or the prior order with attachments.

Accordingly, we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, the court should attach to its order the documentation relied upon in support of its findings. If the court should again deny the motion, appellant has thirty days in which to appeal.

Reversed and remanded.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Winston Rodgers appeals the summary denial of his motion seeking presentence jail time credit. The trial court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing, finding that appellant had filed a prior similar motion, which previously had been denied. Although the trial court noted in the order that portions of the record refuting appellant's allegations were attached to the prior order of denial, the court failed to attach either the prior motion or the prior order with attachments.

Accordingly, we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion and remand the case to the trial court. On remand, the court should attach to its order the documentation relied upon in support of its findings. If the court should again deny the motion, appellant has thirty days in which to appeal.

Reversed and remanded.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and THREADGILL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

580 So. 2d 661, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5552, 1991 WL 101826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodgers-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.