TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Autrey v. State

Autrey v. State, 736 So. 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
June 9, 1999
Docket
No. 99-1251
Judges
Per Curiam
Citations
736 So. 2d 941999 WL 371330
Cited by 6

Opinion — Per Curiam

736 So.2d 94 (1999)

Nelson AUTREY, Appellant,

v.

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 99-1251.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 9, 1999.

Nelson Autrey, Belle Glade, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Elaine L. Thompson, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Nelson Autrey, seeks review of the trial court's order that denied his Rule 3.800 motion wherein he alleged that his sentence is illegal because he did not receive jail credit of 55 days for the time he served before his first violation of probation. As appellant's motion was properly sworn, and timely, we consider it as having been filed in accordance with Rule 3.850, which as the supreme court stated in State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429, 431 (Fla.1998), is the "best procedure for a prisoner to resolve jail credit issues."

As the plea colloquy attached to the lower court's order does not establish a "specific and voluntary waiver" of the 55 days at issue, appellant appears to be entitled to that time. See, e.g., Daily v. State, ___ So.2d ___, 1999 WL 212859 (Fla. 4th DCA Apr.7, 1999) (citing Silverstein v. State, 654 So.2d 1040, 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)); see also Henderson v. State, 720 So.2d 1121 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to either attach additional exhibits to refute appellant's claim, or to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine if appellant waived the 55 days.

POLEN, STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →
1999: 12000: 12001: 12005: 12008: 219992026peak 2008 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Parrella736 So. 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
  2. Barrier v. State987 So. 2d 772 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)
  3. King v. State974 So. 2d 632 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)
  4. Erickson v. State760 So. 2d 983 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)
  5. Byrd v. State789 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
  6. Sainval v. State909 So. 2d 605 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Most recent

  1. Barrier v. State987 So. 2d 772 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)
  2. King v. State974 So. 2d 632 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)
  3. Sainval v. State909 So. 2d 605 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
  4. Byrd v. State789 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
  5. Erickson v. State760 So. 2d 983 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)
  6. State v. Parrella736 So. 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998) 277
Silverstein v. State, 654 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995) 29
Daily v. State, 750 So. 2d 37 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999) 12
Henderson v. State, 720 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998) 11
State v. Parrella, 736 So. 2d 94 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list