Davis v. State

3 Citing cases

  1. Moore v. Stephens

    804 So. 2d 575 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 20 times
    Reversing order granting mandamus petition seeking credit for time previously served, where defendant was sentenced following revocation of probation on true split sentence; after imposition of suspended portion of sentence, credit was not available for time served on unsuspended portion of split sentence

    Thus, if the Department has actually given him credit, it would appear that he has received too much prison credit, not too little.Id. Stephens argues that a defendant who is resentenced to prison after violating the probationary portion of a split sentence is entitled to credit for time served prior to the probationary term, citing Powell v. State, 763 So.2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Davis v. State, 701 So.2d 119 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Smith v. State, 685 So.2d 1362, 1363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); and Silverstein v. State, 654 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). However, all of these cases involve "probationary" split sentences, not "true" split sentences.

  2. Moore v. Stephens

    No. 5D01-539 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Nov. 16, 2001)

    Thus, if the Department has actually given him credit, it would appear that he has received too much prison credit, not too little.Id. Stephens argues that a defendant who is resentenced to prison after violating the probationary portion of a split sentence is entitled to credit for time served prior to the probationary term, citing Powell v. State, 763 So.2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Davis v. State, 701 So.2d 119 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Smith v. State, 685 So.2d 1362, 1363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); and Silverstein v. State, 654 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). However, all of these cases involve "probationary" split sentences, not "true" split sentences.

  3. Powell v. State

    763 So. 2d 364 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 7 times

    Appellant was given credit for only 137 days of time served toward his newly imposed 12 year prison sentence. A defendant who is resentenced to prison after violation of the probationary portion of his split sentence is entitled to credit for time actually served on the prison portion of his split sentence prior to the commencement of the probationary term. Davis v. State, 701 So.2d 119 (Fla.3d DCA 1997); Smith v. State, 685 So.2d 1362, 1363 (Fla.2d DCA 1996); Silverstein v. State, 654 So.2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Additionally, a defendant is entitled to credit for time spent in custody on the violation of probation charges, Morgan v. State, 528 So.2d 991 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), as well as jail credit earned prior to his initial sentencing. We, therefore, remand this case to the trial court for a determination of the proper amount of credit to award appellant for time served.