ROBERT B. OLSEN, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's denial of Olsen's habeas corpus petition challenging parole revocation, holding that plenary appeal is unavailable after judicial review of quasi-judicial parole commission action and that Olsen received due process.
Plenary appeal to a district court is not authorized to review the merits of a circuit court's order reviewing a Parole Commission's quasi-judicial action; instead, such review is limited to certiorari examination of due process and departure from essential requirements of law.
[1] When an inmate has received judicial review of a Parole Commission's quasi-judicial action in circuit court, plenary appellate review by a district court is not available…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a second opportunity for judicial review on the merits by plenary appeal from a circuit court's order would improperly provide the inmate with a "second full bite at the apple in the district court"”
The court explained why plenary appeal is not available after circuit court review of Parole Commission action
Robert B. Olsen's parole was revoked by the Florida Parole Commission. Olsen filed a habeas corpus petition in circuit court challenging the revocatio…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plenary Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
ROTHENBERG, J.
The Florida Parole Commission (“Parole Commission”) issued an order revoking Robert B. Olsen’s (“Olsen”) parole. Thereafter, Olsen filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court, seeking review of the Parole Commission’s order. The circuit court entered an order denying Olsen’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, and Olsen then appealed the circuit court’s order to this Court. Because the circuit court’s review of the Parole Commission’s quasi-judicial action is the equivalent of an appeal, plenary appeal to a district court to review the merits of the circuit court’s order is not authorized. See Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 720 So. 2d 216, 217 (Fla.1998) (holding that after an inmate has been afforded judicial review of the Parole Commission’s actions, a second opportunity for judicial review on the merits by plenary appeal from a circuit court’s order would improperly provide the inmate with a “second full bite at the apple in the district court”). We, therefore, treat Olsen’s notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari.
This Court’s certiorari review is limited to a determination of whether Olsen was afforded due process of law and whether the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law in denying Olsen’s habeas corpus petition. Tarver v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 990 So. 2d 577, 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Because this Court concludes that Olsen was afforded due process of law and there was no departure from the essential requirements of law, we deny the petition for writ of certiorari.
Petition denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 720 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 1998)
- Tarver v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 990 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Smith v. Fla. Dep't of Corr., 255 So. 3d 916 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)