From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kamerman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Feb 16, 2000
765 So. 2d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

reversing sworn motion for jail credit for record attachments showing appellant is not entitled to relief or for evidentiary hearing determining whether Turning Point program qualifies appellant for jail time credit

Summary of this case from Smith v. State

Opinion

No. 4D99-1747.

February 16, 2000.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Dale Ross, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 98-15625 CF10A, 97-8155 CF10A, and 97-7233 CF10A.

Jerry Kamerman, Sanderson, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Don M. Rogers, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


The order denying appellant's sworn motion for jail time credit while attending the Turning Point program is reversed. On remand, the court shall either attach portions of the record conclusively showing no entitlement to relief or shall order an evidentiary hearing as to whether the program qualifies appellant for jail time credit. See Rasik v. State, 717 So.2d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Whitehecul v. State, 677 So.2d 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 19%).

Gunther, Farmer and Gross, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

Kamerman v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Feb 16, 2000
765 So. 2d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

reversing sworn motion for jail credit for record attachments showing appellant is not entitled to relief or for evidentiary hearing determining whether Turning Point program qualifies appellant for jail time credit

Summary of this case from Smith v. State
Case details for

Kamerman v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jerry Kamerman, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Feb 16, 2000

Citations

765 So. 2d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Smith v. State

Appellant's motion was properly denied because his claim requires an evidentiary hearing and must be raised…

Hamilton v. State

In cases where the defendant has made a conclusory allegation of jail-like conditions, we have directed trial…