MACK L. JENKINS, APPELLANT,
v.
RONALD G. WILLIAMS, SUPERINTENDENT, BAKER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, 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 reversed the trial court's summary denial of a habeas corpus petition for withheld gain time, holding that the petition sufficiently identified the type of gain time claimed by reference to the applicable administrative rule.
A habeas corpus petition claiming entitlement to incentive gain time under Florida Administrative Code Rule 33-11.0065 is sufficiently specific and cannot be summarily denied as deficient.
[1] A habeas corpus petition challenging withheld gain time is not deficient merely because the petitioner initially fails to specify the type of gain time claimed, if the pe…
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 intelligenceJenkins, an habitual violent felony offender, filed a habeas corpus petition seeking restoration of gain time withheld in December 1995. The trial cou…
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 Incentive Gain Time cases and more on FLexlaw
MICKLE, Judge.
Appellant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court requesting that appellee be directed to restore gain time withheld during the month of December, 1995. The lower court elected to treat the pleading as a petition for writ of mandamus and denied relief on the basis that appellant failed to specify the type of gain time to which he was claiming entitlement and failed to show that he had a clear legal right to receive gain time. No show cause order was issued. Appellant then filed a motion for rehearing, asserting that he had been sentenced as an habitual violent felony offender, thus entitling him only to incentive gain time, and that in his petition he was referring to incentive gain time to which he claimed entitlement under section 944.275(4)(b), Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 33-11.0065. Rehearing was denied and this appeal ensued.
Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the lower court erred in summarily denying the petition as deficient. The allegations contained in the petition and in the motion for rehearing specifically refer to Florida Administrative Code Rule 33-11.0065, which governs incentive gain time, and are sufficient to identify the type of gain time to which appellant is claiming entitlement. We reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to reconsider the petition in light of the foregoing.
REVERSED and REMANDED for reconsideration.
MINER and ALLEN, JJ., concur.