final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2)
from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County Lower Tribunal
No. 13-26508, Cristina Miranda, Judge.
Shotwell, in proper person.
Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jacob Addicott, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
WELLS, LAGOA, and SALTER, JJ.
Willie Shotwell ("Shotwell"), appeals the trial
court's denial of his amended motion for correction of
jail credit filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal
Procedure 3.801(a). We reverse the trial court's order
denying Shotwell's motion with prejudice, and remand to
the trial court to provide Shotwell with the opportunity to
file an amended, legally sufficient Rule 3.801 motion.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
8, 2014, in case number F13-26508, Shotwell pled guilty to
one count of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and was
sentenced to 24 months imprisonment.
August 26, 2014, pursuant to Rule 3.801, Florida Rules of
Criminal Procedure, Shotwell filed a motion for correction of
jail credit. In that motion, Shotwell argued that the trial
court's files contain documents filed on July 8, 2014-his
sentencing date-that conclusively establish that, at the time
he was sentenced, he was entitled to 238 days credit for time
previously served in Miami-Dade County Jail and that the
sentencing court did not award any credit due for time
September 25, 2014, the trial court entered an order
summarily denying Shotwell's Rule 3.801 motion as
insufficient. Subsequently, Shotwell filed a pro se motion
for rehearing acknowledging that the trial court "may
have been correct in stating that Mr. Shotwell's Motion
was insufficient, " as it did not comply with the
requirements of Rule 3.801. Shotwell, therefore, asked the
trial court for permission to amend his motion for correction
of jail credit. On December 4, 2014, the trial court
summarily denied Shotwell's motion for rehearing as
insufficient, and Shotwell filed a Notice of Appeal.
response to that appeal, the State conceded error and asked
this Court to modify the trial court's decision by
affirming the denial of the 3.801 motion to specify that it
was without prejudice to Shotwell refiling an amended motion
within 60 days. Subsequently, in Shotwell v. State,
183 So.3d 1070, 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015), this Court affirmed
without prejudice to Shotwell filing "an amended,
legally sufficient 3.801 petition within sixty (60)
days" of the date of the issuance of that opinion-May 6,
2015. Six days later, on May 12, 2015, Shotwell filed an
amended 3.801(a) motion for correction of jail credit in this
Court. On June 9, 2015, this Court issued an order dismissing
Shotwell's amended 3.801(a) motion for correction of jail
credit "without prejudice, " in order for Shotwell
to refile in the circuit court.
17, 2015, Shotwell filed a new Rule 3.801(a) motion for
correction of jail credit. In that motion, Shotwell argued
that he is entitled to 249 days credit towards his sentence
and that he did not waive any of credit for time served. On
July 29, 2015, however, the State filed a response which did
not acknowledge this Court's previous order
allowing Shotwell to refile his Rule 3.801(a)
motion. Instead, in its response, the State
asserted that Shotwell's claim was barred for having been
raised in previous motions. Additionally, the State argued
that the judgment and sentence showed "that the
defendant was to receive no credit for the time he had
29, 2015, the trial court again entered an order denying
Shotwell's amended motion for correction of jail credit.
In this written order, the trial court found that Shotwell
had previously appealed the trial court's order denying
his motion for correction of jail credit. The trial court
further found that the trial court's previous