Case Name: Ross ORTA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2010-08-13
Citations: 41 So. 3d 1092
Docket Number: No. 5D10-2063
Parties: Ross ORTA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 41
Pages: 1092–1092

Head Matter:
Ross ORTA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D10-2063.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Aug. 13, 2010.
Ross Orta, Carrabelle, pro se.
No Appearance for Appellee.

Opinion:
JACOBUS, J.
We affirm the trial court's denial of Appellant's motion seeking additional jail credit because the motion was facially insufficient. Our affirmance, however, is without prejudice to Appellant's right to re-file his motion in a manner that specifies the dates for which Appellant claims an entitlement to additional jail credit. See Santiago v. State, 22 So.3d 789, 789-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) ("[T]he motion must affirmatively allege that the trial court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief. A mere conclusory allegation that the answer lies in the record is insufficient to satisfy the pleading requirements of the rule."); Williams v. State, 4 So.3d 728, 729 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) ("Although a jail credit claim may be raised by use of a 3.800(a) motion to correct sentence, the movant must demonstrate that the record shows an entitlement to additional jail credit, as well as a sentence that fails to grant such credit.").
AFFIRMED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SAWAYA and TORPY, JJ., concur.