Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

524 So. 2d 488

524 So.2d 488

13 Fla.L.Weekly 1064

Austin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1988-05-04

Relies on Anders v. California · Rushing v. State · Signal Applied Technologies, Inc. v. Finley

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-05-04

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 2014

4 state decisions

201988199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

WIGGINTON, Judge.

¶1Before us is an appeal brought pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm appellant’s judgment and sentence but our review of the record revealed that the sentencing documents allow appellant a total of 400 days “plus time served ” as jail credit. Accordingly, we must remand the cause to the trial court to correct the sentences to show the exact number of days of credit. Casteel v. State, 519 So.2d 64 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Rushing v. State, 355 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).

ERVIN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
/524/so2d/488 · .json · Public domain