Call us now:
Florida Court Clarifies Jail Credit and Probation Length — and 1st DCA Certifies Conflict
On August 6, 2025, Florida’s First District Court of Appeal issued an opinion in Medley v. State addressing a nuanced but important question: does credit for time served in jail shorten not only the custodial portion of a probation sentence, but also the probationary period itself? The court’s answer was clear — no. Unless the sentencing court expressly states otherwise, jail credit applies only to the custodial condition of probation, not to the overall term of probation.
Background of the Case
Demari Medley was charged in two related cases in 2020 with burglary, theft, and related offenses. He entered a negotiated plea and was sentenced to 48 months of probation, with a special condition that he serve 120 days in county jail, receiving credit for 76 days he had already served.
In March 2024, Medley was arrested on new burglary and theft charges. The State filed affidavits of violation of probation, and after a hearing, the trial court found him in violation, revoked probation, and sentenced him to 15 years in prison.
On appeal, Medley argued the trial court lacked jurisdiction to revoke probation because his 48-month term had already expired once the 76 days of jail credit were applied. In his view, probation should have ended in February 2024, before the violation affidavits were filed.
The Court’s Holding
The First District rejected Medley’s argument. The court explained that jail credit applies to incarceration but does not automatically shorten probation unless the sentencing court expressly provides otherwise.
- The court distinguished Van Tassel v. Coffman, 486 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 1986), which allowed gain time to shorten custodial time imposed as a condition of probation, but said Van Tassel did not address whether jail credit can reduce probation itself.
- Instead, the First District relied on its own precedent, including Willis v. State, 543 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), holding that jail credit applies “against the period of incarceration which was imposed as a condition of community control,” not against probationary terms.
The court concluded that “jail does not substitute for probation,” and therefore the trial court retained jurisdiction to revoke Medley’s probation.
Certified Conflict with the Fifth District
Significantly, the court certified conflict with the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s decision in Smith v. State, 348 So. 3d 1208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020). In Smith, the Fifth District reached the opposite conclusion, holding that jail credit for time served should reduce the entire probationary term.
By certifying conflict, the First District formally signaled that two appellate districts are in disagreement on a point of law. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(a)(2)(A)(vi). This means the Florida Supreme Court now has the discretion — and perhaps the obligation — to step in and resolve the inconsistency.
Why This Matters to Practitioners
For defense attorneys and probationers alike, the ruling is surprising. Many practitioners in the Fifth District have relied on Smith to argue that probation ends earlier when jail credit is factored in. But under the First District’s holding in Medley, probation continues until the full period expires, unless a sentencing judge explicitly reduces the term.
This divergence creates uncertainty: probationers in North Florida (First DCA) and Central Florida (Fifth DCA) may face different outcomes under nearly identical circumstances. That inconsistency can have life-changing consequences when probation is violated close to the expiration date.
Key Takeaway
The Medley decision underscores the importance of carefully reviewing sentencing orders and understanding how jail credit is applied. Unless the trial court clearly states otherwise, time served in jail reduces only the custodial portion of a sentence, not the probationary period. And with certified conflict between Florida’s First and Fifth DCAs, practitioners should be alert for possible review by the Florida Supreme Court.
Why Retaining an Attorney Matters
Criminal Defense Lawyer Matt Landsman at Landsman Law helps people accused of crimes in Gainesville, Alachua County, Bradford County, Levy County, Gilchrist County, and surrounding areas of north Florida. If you need help for yourself or a loved one, contact Criminal Defense Attorney Matt Landsman for a free consultation today. For help with any Criminal Matter from Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer Matt Landsman – CALL NOW
If you’re accused of any criminal matter, retaining an attorney is critical to protecting your rights. These cases will involve constitutional questions and concern allegations of misconduct or are sensitive in nature, requiring a skill, preparation and experience. For expert legal help, contact Gainesville Defense Lawyer Matt Landsman to protect your rights today.