THOMAS CLEMENTS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 a claim for additional gain time must first be presented administratively to the Department of Corrections before filing a petition for mandamus.
Thomas Clements, a habitual offender sentenced for sexual battery, sought postconviction relief to obtain more gain time. He did not challenge the und…
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 Heggs Window cases and more on FLexlaw
ALTENBERND, Acting Chief Judge.
We affirm the trial court’s order denying relief to Thomas Clements on his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Mr. Clements received a thirty-year term of imprisonment as a habitual offender for a sexual battery. This offense apparently occurred during the Heggs window. See Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000). Mr. Clements does not claim that he is entitled to resentencing on this sentence. Instead, he claims that he is now entitled to more gain time than he has previously received.
We take no position on the merits of this claim.1 We agree with the trial court, however, that this claim must first be presented administratively to the Department of Corrections. If the prisoner is not satisfied with the ruling of the Department, he can then file a petition for mandamus with the appropriate circuit court. See Newsome v. Singletary, 637 So. 2d 9, 11 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994).
Affirmed.
WHATLEY and SALCINES, JJ., Concur. . Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla.2000), declared chapter 95-184, Laws of Florida, unconstitutional in its entirety. Section 26 of that chapter affects the gain-time statute. See § 944.275, Fla. Stat. (1995). We note, however, that the major 1995 amendment to section 944.275 occurred in the "Stop Turning Out Prisoners Act,” in chapter 95-294, Laws of Florida, which is not addressed in Heggs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (39 total)
-
Lowery v. State, 766 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…ppellant’s gain-time challenge must first be entertained in the Department of Corrections. If the appellant is not satisfied with its ruling, then he can file a petition for writ of mandamus with the appropriate circuit court. See Clements v. State, 761 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). AFFIRMED; STEVENSON, SHAHOOD and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.…
-
RAY v. State, 772 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…lorida Statutes (1995), made by chapter 95-184, Laws of Florida.1 We do not address the merits of this claim because Ray must first present this claim through the administrative channels of the Department of Corrections (DOC). See Clements v. State, 761 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). If Ray is not satisfied with the ruling of the DOC, he can then file a petition for mandamus with the appropriate circuit court. See Newsome v. Singletary, 637 So. 2d 9, 11 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Affirmed. PARKER, A.C.J., and WHAT…
-
Gatto v. State, 768 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…for offenses occurring in 1996. The trial court correctly denied appellant’s gain-time challenge, but denial should be without prejudice to his right to exhaust his administrative remedies with the Department of Corrections. See Clements v. State, 761 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). However, the trial court erred in summarily denying appellant’s other sentencing challenge under Heggs without record attachments. Appellant appears to fall within the appropriate window period to make his sentencing challenge.…
Previewing 3 of 39 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Heggs v. State, 759 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 2000)
- Hogan v. Ardc Corp., 637 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)