William Joesph Mann v. State of Florida

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
WILLIAM JOSEPH MANN, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
v. CASE NO. 1D15-2704
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed November 13, 2015.
An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Nassau County.
Robert M. Foster, Judge.
William Joseph Mann, pro se, Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Jillian H. Reding, Assistant Attorney General
and Trisha Meggs Pate, Bureau Chief, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
William Joseph Mann appeals the summary denial of his motion seeking
postconviction relief brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure
3.800(a). For the reasons discussed below, we reverse and remand for further
proceedings.
The appellant originally filed a postconviction motion pursuant to Florida
Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.801 seeking additional jail credit, which was
summarily denied on the merits. On appeal, this Court reversed and remanded with
instructions for the trial court to either attach records refuting the appellant’s claim
or enter an order providing the appellant with leave to amend his facially insufficient
motion. See Mann v. State, 160 So. 3d 554, 555 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). On remand,
the trial court provided the appellant with an opportunity to amend.
Instead of filing an amended motion seeking jail credit, the appellant filed the
instant rule 3.800(a) motion, seeking credit for time previously spent in prison on
the incarcerative term of his original probationary split sentence pursuant to Dortly
v. State, 107 So. 3d 1229, 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). The lower court summarily
denied the motion, indicating that the appellant was awarded one day of jail credit
and failed to object to this credit at sentencing. In support of its order, the court
attached the sentencing transcripts. However, in response to this Court’s Toler1
order, the state properly concedes that these attachments do not refute the appellant’s
claim.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand for further
1
Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
2
proceedings. If the trial court again summarily denies the motion, the court shall
attach record excerpts which conclusively refute the appellant’s entitlement to prison
credit.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
WOLF, WETHERELL and MARSTILLER, J.J., CONCUR.
3