his judgment and sentence, the State’s motion was unauthorized. The circuit court could not have treated the State’s motion as if filed pursuant to rule 3.800(b) because the State may file a rule 3.800(b) motion “only if the correction of the sentencing error would benefit the defendant or to correct a scrivener’s error.” See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(b). The State commendably has conceded error. Therefore, the order of the circuit court granting the motion must be reversed. On remand, the circuit court should strike the State’s motion as unauthorized and should restore the rescinded credit. In any future proceedings seeking the vacation of the previously awarded jail credit, the State should consider the impact of this court’s opinion in Lebron v. State, 870 So.2d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (<HOLDING>), and the opinion of the First District Court
holding that the statutory entitlement to presentence jail credit starts with the initial arrest for a criminal offense holding that a trial court may not rescind jail credit previously awarded even if the initial award was improper holding that a youth detention facility was a jail for purposes of statute requiring credit for time served in jail while awaiting trial holding that jail records can properly be considered in determining jail credit issues raised pursuant to rule 3800a holding defendant who received treatment in a state hospital was not entitled to jail credit for that time