GEORGE JOHNSON ODOM, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, APPELLEE
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 the calculation of a presumptive parole release date (PPRD) by aggregating pre-parole and post-parole criminal episodes, and using updated guidelines, was permissible.
Odom appealed the calculation of his PPRD after his parole was revoked and new sentences were imposed. The calculation involved aggregating times from…
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 Presumptive Parole Release Date cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Odom appeals the establishment of his presumptive parole release date (PPRD). We affirm. Odom was paroled, pursuant to a PPRD, from several sentences for burglary in December 1980. In 1982, his parole was revoked and additional sentences for burglaries and two grand thefts were imposed. A new PPRD was calculated. Separate scoring was done for the pre-parole criminal episode and the post-parole episode. The times were then aggregated.
Odom analogizes aggregation and aggravation. He challenges the use of his pre-pa-role crimes in the salient factor scoring for his post-parole commitment and then aggregating the times. This issue was decided adversely to Odom in Nord v. Florida Parole and Prob. Com’n., 417 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
One of Odom’s 1977 crimes resulted in a 20-month assessment although only 14 months were assessed prior to Odom’s parole. The binding effect of the prior PPRD determination was waived by Odom’s parole violations.
Odom challenges use of 1982 PPRD guidelines for his 1977 crimes. Lopez v. Florida Parole and Prob. Com’n., 410 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), is indistinguishable.
Odom was set at the top of the matrix for one of his 1981 crimes, although no pre-sen-tence investigation (PSI) was conducted. There is ample record support, including three PSI reports for other crimes and a revocation report, for the Commission’s action.
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 515 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…ormation previously known to the Commission may not be used as an aggravating factor. The [*1046] decision in Gaines does not, as argued by the Commission, conflict with either this court’s holding in Odom v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 433 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) or in Schultz v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 432 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Accordingly, the trial court’s denial of appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus is reversed, and the matter is remanded for the tri…
Authorities Cited
- Lopez v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 410 So. 2d 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Nord v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 417 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)