JOHNNY HUNTER, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA PAROLE & PROBATION COMMISSION, RESPONDENT

11th Cir. | 1982-04-30
No. 81-5536
674 F.2d 847 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1982) Positive Treatment
Cited by 18 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Johnny Hunter, filed a pro se petition for the writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254, in which he contended that the Florida Parole and Probation Commission violated his right to due process by improperly calculating his presumptive parole release date. Acting upon a recommendation of the magistrate, the district court dismissed the action for the reason that the Florida parole statutes create no constitutionally protected liberty interest.

The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies when government action deprives a person of liberty or property. Greenholtz v. Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 U.S. 1, 7, 99 S.Ct. 2100, 2103, 60 L.Ed.2d 668 (1979). While there is no inherent or constitutional right to conditional release before the expiration of a valid sentence, a state may create a protectible liberty interest in the establishment of a parole system. Id. at 12, 99 S.Ct. at 2106. The former Fifth Circuit has held, however, that no liberty interest in parole was created by the Florida statutes. Staton v. Wainwright, 665 F. 2d 686 (5th Cir. 1982). We agree.

Accordingly, we hold that the petition was properly dismissed as there was no deprivation of a federally protected right.

AFFIRMED.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (11 total)

  • Dornau v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 420 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
    …tion is without merit because the hearing examiner’s recommendation is not binding on the Commission. Furthermore, Florida’s parole procedures create no constitutionally protected liberty interests. Hunter v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 674 F. 2d 847 (11th Cir.1982). We shall not address Dornau’s remaining contention because they relate to the establishment of his initial PPRD. The scope of a biennial review hearing is limited to determining whether new information has been gathered since the i…
  • Black v. State, 490 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
    …1983); Baggett v. Wainwright, 229 So. 2d 239 (Fla.1969). The setting of a PPRD under the Florida statutory scheme does not involve an interest in liberty that implicates federal constitutional rights. Hunter v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission, 674 F. 2d 847 (11th Cir.1982); Staton v. Wainwright, 665 F. 2d 686 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 909, 102 S.Ct. 1757, 72 L.Ed.2d 166 (1982). Accordingly, we conclude that the remedy of habeas corpus to secure a belated appeal cannot be utilized to obtain rev…
  • Woulard v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 426 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
    …ission, 424 So. 2d 122 [8 FLW 73] (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Woulard is also in error as to the second issue he raises. It appears there is no general constitutional right to notice of a rule change. See Hunter v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 674 F. 2d 847, 848 (11th Cir.1982); Staton v. Wainwright, 665 F. 2d 686, 688 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 909, 102 S.Ct. 1757, 72 L.Ed.2d 166 (1982). Moreover, there has been no violation of the notice requirements of Section 120.54(l)(a), Florida Statu…

Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw