Sullo v. State
663 So. 2d 11, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12575, 1995 WL 700185
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 29, 1995·No. No. 95-2587·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Appellant seeks review of an order summarily denying his rule 3.800(a) motion. Following Fountain v. State, 660 So.2d 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for further proceedings. If the record can answer the question of whether appellant is entitled to jail time credit, the rule 3.800(a) motion is appropriate for seeking relief. If that fact cannot be determined from the record, the rule 3.800(a) motion should be denied.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sullo v. State, 663 So. 2d 11, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12575, 1995 WL 700185 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).
663 So. 2d 11 (Sullo v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Vanderblomen v. State
709 So. 2d 144 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Ford v. State
667 So. 2d 455 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)