Tonny President v. State of Florida
This text of 166 So. 3d 951 (Tonny President v. State of Florida) 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.
Opinion
We affirm the denial of defendant’s motion to clarify his sentence. See, e.g., Hardenbrook v. State, 953 So.2d 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (“Once the sentencing judge has awarded a defendant prior prison credit, the Department of Corrections has primary responsibility for calculating the credit.”). As to any new claims raised on rehearing, we affirm the denial without prejudice to the defendant’s right to raise them in a legally sufficient, separately-filed motion, in the trial court.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
166 So. 3d 951, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9250, 2015 WL 3761331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tonny-president-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2015.