BILL STROUD v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •        Third District Court of Appeal
    State of Florida
    Opinion filed January 4, 2023.
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    ________________
    No. 3D22-1908
    Lower Tribunal Nos. F18-18896, F18-22274, F19-4950, F19-4951, F19-
    4952, F19-4953, F19-5181, F19-7351 and F19-13087
    ________________
    Bill Stroud,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    The State of Florida,
    Appellee.
    An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from
    the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Diana Vizcaino, Judge.
    Bill Stroud, in proper person.
    Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.
    Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LINDSEY, and LOBREE, JJ.
    FERNANDEZ, C.J.
    Bill Stroud appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion for jail
    credit pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801. Stroud alleges
    that in case number F19-13087, he was taken into custody while in jail and
    arraigned on April 22, 2019. On July 26, 2021, Stroud pled guilty to several
    cases, including F19-2019, and received a concurrent sentence of five (5)
    years in state prison followed by five (5) years of reporting probation with all
    credit for time served on each case. There were a total of nine (9) cases,
    and Stroud was sentenced in each of the nine cases with different periods of
    credit for time served in each case. Stroud alleges that he should have
    received credit for 823 days in F19-2019, but instead received credit for only
    753 days. Stroud does not challenge jail credit in the remaining cases.
    In its order denying the motion for jail credit, the trial court noted the
    Stroud’s “[m]otion does not allege any illegalities in sentence,” that the
    “[r]ecord on its face reflects sentences are to run concurrent but not
    coterminous,” and that the “[m]otion does not allege sentence exceeds the
    statutory maximum.”     All are correct statements; however, none of the
    statements address the appellant’s claim, that is, that he did not receive the
    amount of jail credit on F19-2019 to which he was entitled. We therefore
    reverse and remand for the trial court to consider and rule on the appellant’s
    motion for jail credit. See Utria v. State, 
    305 So. 3d 17
     (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
    2
    Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1908

Filed Date: 1/4/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/4/2023