Narrative Opinion Summary
The trial court's ruling that the appellant was not entitled to additional jail credit lacks supporting documentation from the record. Despite this deficiency, the appellant is not granted relief because he did not provide the specific dates for which he is seeking jail credit. The court affirms the trial court's decision, with Chief Justice Wolf and Justices Lewis and Polston concurring.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Lower Court's Decisionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, indicating agreement with the lower court's ruling in the absence of adequate evidence from the appellant.
Reasoning: The court affirms the trial court's decision, with Chief Justice Wolf and Justices Lewis and Polston concurring.
Burden of Proof on Appellantsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant is denied relief as he failed to specify the dates for which he claimed jail credit, highlighting the necessity for appellants to provide detailed evidence in support of their claims.
Reasoning: Despite this deficiency, the appellant is not granted relief because he did not provide the specific dates for which he is seeking jail credit.
Entitlement to Jail Creditsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's claim for additional jail credit was denied due to a lack of specific documentation and details provided by the appellant.
Reasoning: The trial court's ruling that the appellant was not entitled to additional jail credit lacks supporting documentation from the record.