JAMES SAWYER, PETITIONER,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT AND G. STRICKLAND, RESPONDENTS
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 court held that it cannot rule on motions seeking relief unrelated to the original petition and that the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
[1] A court cannot rule on motions that seek relief unrelated to that requested in the original petition.
[2] A motion for rehearing or clarification must address the court's prior order of dismissal.
Previewing 2 of 5 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, an inmate, filed a motion asking the court to order the respondent to allow him to use the writ room for legal research, referencing a pre…
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 Ministerial Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This court dismissed the petition for writ of habeas corpus because Sawyer, an inmate in the Florida prison system, had not alleged facts showing that he is entitled to immediate release from close management custody. He has now filed, in reference to this dismissed case, a motion asking this court to order respondent to allow him to use the writ room (annex to law library) for purposes of doing legal research in order to properly prepare a petition.
This court cannot rule on motions which seek relief unrelated to that requested in the original petition.
Rule 9.330(a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, permits this court to entertain a motion for rehearing or clarification, if it is filed within 15 days of our order. We decline to treat the motion inappropriately filed in this case, as a motion for rehearing or for clarification, because it does not address our dismissal of the petition. When an inmate, as petitioner in this “motion”, desires to have a Department of Corrections officer’s action set aside, he should first exhaust his administrative remedies, showing which rules and/or statutes are being violated. See Fla.Admin.Code Rule 33-3.07. If he does not receive the relief sought at the administrative level, he should timely seek judicial review of the final agency action by appeal to this court. See Morris v. Wainwright, 409 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(c).
When an inmate, as petitioner in his original petition, seeks immediate release from custody, he should seek a writ of habeas corpus from the circuit court in the county where his institution is located. If he does not receive the relief sought in the circuit court, he should timely appeal the final order of the circuit court to the appropriate district court of appeal. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(b).
We therefore decline to rule on petitioner’s motion filed in a dismissed case. We further decline to treat the motion as a petition for writ of mandamus because petitioner has not shown that permitting him to use the writ room is a ministerial duty of the Department of Corrections officer and because petitioner has not exhausted his administrative remedies. Finally, we cannot treat this motion as a notice of appeal because there is no final agency action to review.
MILLS, ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tereatha Robinson v. Dep't OF Health, 89 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…d of appeal is available. Fla. High School Athletic Ass’n v. Melbourne Cent. Catholic High School, 867 So. 2d 1281, 1288 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); see State, Dep’t of Transp. v. Hendry Corp., 500 So. 2d 218, 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Sawyer v. Wainwright, 422 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). The Whistle-blower’s Act provides a statutory cause of action for employees of state agencies, among others, who face adverse personnel action as a result of certain protected activities. §§ 112.3187(8)(a); 112.31895(4)(a…
-
Jackson v. Parkhouse, 826 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…al capacities, Mr. Jackson was required to plead and prove that he had exhausted administrative remedies. See Park v. Dugger, 548 So. 2d 1167, 1168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Millard v. State, 503 So. 2d 939, 941 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Sawyer v. Wainwright, 422 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Morris v. Wainwright, 409 So. 2d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Jones v. Wainwright, 298 So. 2d 542, 542-43 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); see generally 41 FI. Jur.2d Prisons and Prisoners § 213 (“Judicial Relief; Necessity of Exhau…
-
Lowery v. Lawton Chiles, 687 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed without prejudice to pursue appropriate administrative remedies. See Sawyer v. Wainwright, 422 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). GLICKSTEIN, KLEIN and GROSS, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Millard Whitfield v. State, 409 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Holmes v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 409 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)