Tonny President v. State of Florida

166 So. 3d 951, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9250, 2015 WL 3761331

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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.

GROSS, CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.