WILLIAM VAN POYCK, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1983-05-17
No. AP-297
ERVIN, WENTWORTH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.
431 So. 2d 692 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Inmate Van Poyck appeals from the Commission’s order of October 22, 1982 declining to review errors which he alleged were committed during the Commission’s establishment of his presumptive parole release date in 1980. We affirm.

Van Poyck sought administrative review following his biennial interview in July 1982 of matters that were raised, or could have been raised, on appeal of his PPRD two years before. A biennial review may not be used for this purpose. See Broxson v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 425 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Cook v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 423 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Sheets v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 423 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

ERVIN, WENTWORTH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Donnie Bullard v. State, 436 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
    …quate, if conducted properly. Defense counsel did object to the admission of hearsay in the form of statements of an absent witness presented to the jury through the testimony of a police officer. That testimony was inadmissible. Driessen v. State, 431 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Cox v. State, 394 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Although the trial court erred in admitting the testimony, the error must be deemed harmless in light of the three eyewitness identifications presented to the jury. For these rea…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw