RICKY LAMAR LEWIS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 petitioner failed to demonstrate entitlement to a writ of mandamus because no ministerial duty was shown to be unperformed.
Ricky Lamar Lewis petitioned for mandamus and other relief, claiming the record in his direct appeal was incomplete or inaccurate. He relied on a prio…
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 Ministerial Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This proceeding originated when Ricky Lamar Lewis petitioned the Supreme Court of Florida for mandamus, prohibition, habeas corpus, and other relief. That court treated it as a petition for writ of mandamus, denied it in part (including any claim that appellate counsel was ineffective), and transferred the petition to this court for consideration of Lewis’ claim that the record in his direct appeal to this court was incomplete or inaccurate. Petitioner places particular reliance on his petition for writ of mandamus and the response thereto in a case where relief was granted, Lewis v. State, 744 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). There we held that Lewis was entitled to have the trial court rule on certain motions which were pending in his postconviction claim for relief.
Petitioner misunderstands the response in that case and our ruling. The respondent did not concede that the motions should be resolved in Lewis’ favor nor did this court so hold. The function of a writ of mandamus in this circumstance is simply to direct that a pending matter be disposed of without giving direction as to how the lower tribunal should rule. Kramp v. Fagan, 568 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
In the instant matter, Lewis has not demonstrated that a respondent has failed to perform a ministerial duty and thus entitlement to a writ of mandamus has not been shown. See Mattson v. Kolhage, 569 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Petitioner has not identified any other extraordinary writ remedy which would he to present the instant claim nor are we aware of any original jurisdictional vehicle which would allow us to reach the issue. The postcon-viction proceedings below and, if unsuccessful, an appeal from the final order therein, would appear to be Lewis’ only method to address the accuracy of the record in the direct appeal. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied.
PETITION DENIED.
BARFIELD, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Milanick v. Town OF Beverly Beach, 820 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…s, 560 So. 2d at 323; Holland v. Wainwright, 499 So. 2d 21, 22 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (“The writ may be used to compel the performance of a ministerial duty imposed by law where it has not been performed as the law requires.”). See also Lewis v. State, 764 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Plymel at 246-247. The question for the trial court was whether the petitioner demonstrated a pri-ma facie case for mandamus relief; to wit: did the Town, acting through its council, have a clear legal duty to perform a minist…
-
Craige Plymel v. Moore, 770 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…ms, 560 So. 2d at 323; Holland v. Wainwright, 499 So. 2d 21, 22 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)(“The writ may be used to compel the performance of a ministerial duty imposed by law where it has not been performed as the law requires.”). See also Lewis v. State, 764 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). A prisoner seeking mandamus relief must demon [*247] strate that he or she has exhausted available administrative remedies. See Barber v. State, 661 So. 2d 355, 356 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). “All facts alleged in the order to show ca…
Authorities Cited
- Kramp v. Osee R. Fagan, 568 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Mattson v. Kolhage, 569 So. 2d 1358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Lewis v. State, 744 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)