Taylor v. State
939 So. 2d 1158, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17512, 2006 WL 2987115
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 20, 2006·No. No. 2D06-2461·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Sheldon K. Taylor challenges the denial of his motion for jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm the postconviction court’s order because Taylor’s motion is facially insufficient. See Gilbert v. State, 805 So.2d 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Colosimo v. State, 775 So.2d 352 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). However, our affirmance is without prejudice to Taylor’s right to file a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Taylor v. State, 939 So. 2d 1158, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 17512, 2006 WL 2987115 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).
939 So. 2d 1158 (Taylor v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Budd v. State
939 So. 2d 1158 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)