With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". on April 30, 2008. While rule 3.800(a) requires a defendant to identify records that show the sentence is illegal, rule 3.850 allows a defendant to state a sufficient claim through sworn allegations, and if the claim is sufficient, the defendant can build a record through an evidentiary hearing. Thus, we find the current motion is not procedurally barred. In addition, the present motion raises a slightly different claim. The rule 3.800(a) motion filed by counsel sought 508 days of credit for time served in a Miami jail from the date of a Broward detainer; whereas, the instant rule 3.850 motion seeks 483 days of credit from the date of the arrest on the Broward fugitive warrant as reflected in the Miami arrest affidavit. See Martinez v. State, 940 So.2d 1277, 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (<HOLDING>). Because the instant motion is not

A: holding that both saline county and grant county had jurisdiction to try the appellant for murder where the actual killing occurred in one county but the acts requisite to the consummation of the murder and the subsequent disposal of the body occurred in the other county
B: holding that the grant county prosecutor had a statutory duty to be legal advisor to the county clerk even though she was not embroiled in litigation in which the county was the real party in interest
C: recognizing county officers as  those whose general authority and jurisdiction are confined within the limits of the county in which they are appointed who are appointed in and for a particular county and whose duties apply only to that county and through whom the county performs its usual political functions 
D: holding that if defendant was actually arrested in dade county on the broward county warrant he could be entitled to credit in one of two circumstances
D.