JAMES HOLMAN, JR., PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION 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.
Petition for writ of mandamus to challenge parole release date calculation is denied because an adequate ordinary remedy by direct appeal is available under Section 120.68, Florida Statutes.
A writ of mandamus is not available to challenge a parole commission's presumptive parole release date calculation when an adequate remedy by direct appeal exists.
[1] A writ of mandamus is unavailable to challenge a parole commission's presumptive parole release date when direct appeal is an adequate remedy under Section 120.68, Florid…
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 intelligencePetitioner Holman sought a writ of mandamus alleging the Parole and Probation Commission improperly calculated his presumptive parole release date.…
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 Adequate Remedy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this petition for writ of mandamus, petitioner alleges that the Parole and Probation Commission improperly calculated his presumptive parole release date. In Daniels v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 401 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 1 DCA 1981), this Court held that the final action of the Commission establishing a prisoner’s presumptive parole release date was reviewable by direct appeal pursuant to Section 120.68, Florida Statutes (1979). One of the requirements that must be met before a writ of mandamus will issue is that no other adequate remedy exists. Shevin ex rel. State v. Public Service Commission, 333 So. 2d 9 (Fla.1976). This Court may not “... employ an extraordinary remedy to assist a litigant who has foregone an ordinary one which would have served adequately.” State ex rel. Dept. of General Services v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580, 592-93 (Fla. 1 DCA 1977). Since an adequate and ordinary remedy by direct appeal is available to challenge the propriety of the Commission’s action, this petition must be denied.
We note that if the date of final agency action is included in a petition and if that date is within thirty days of the filing of the petition, this Court can treat the petition as a notice of appeal, see Fla.R.App.P. 9.040(c), and ultimately consider the cause on its merits. However, although petitioner alleges that the Commission reviewed his presumptive parole release date pursuant to Section 947.173, he fails to state the date of the Commission’s final action.
Therefore, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED.
McCORD, LARRY G. SMITH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Falls Chase Special Taxing Dist., 424 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ut significance. One cannot by neglect and delay dissipate an ordinary APA remedy and then complain of its loss as the basis for claiming an extraordinary judicial one. Willis, 344 So. 2d at 592-93; Holman v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 407 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “No rule is better settled,” it is said, “than that equity aids the vigilant and not’ the indolent.” Lanigan v. Lanigan, 78 So. 2d 92, 96 (Fla.1955). Concerning the developers’ allegation that no APA remedy was available becaus…
-
Kirsch v. Greadington, 425 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…lling a public officer to perform a ministerial duty, subject to the judicially imposed restraints of exhausting one’s administrative remedies and of having no adequate legal remedy. Thereafter, in Holman v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 407 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), we indicated that review of Commission action by mandamus will not lie when a § 120.68 appeal is available. We stated that petitions for extraordinary writs that state the date of final agency action and that are filed here or w…
-
Bizzigotti v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 410 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ing by the Commission relating to the jewelry loss, and any judicial review thereafter shall be had in accordance with Daniels v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, supra, footnote 1. See also Holman v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 407 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Dep't OF Gen. Servs. v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Daniels v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 401 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Shevin v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 333 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1976)