ADOLPHUS S. ASHLEY, PETITIONER,
v.
MICHAEL W. MOORE, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, REYES, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER I, BULTIN, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER I, SANTA ROSA CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, RESPONDENTS
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 quashed the circuit court's denial of habeas corpus and remanded for treatment as a mandamus petition, finding the lower court departed from essential requirements of law by requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before addressing access to grievance procedures.
A petition challenging denial of access to administrative grievance remedies should be treated as a mandamus petition rather than habeas corpus, and the circuit court erred in requiring exhaustion of remedies before addressing the underlying claim.
[1] A petition challenging a prisoner's denial of access to administrative grievance procedures should be treated as a mandamus petition rather than dismissed on habeas corpu…
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 intelligenceAshley alleged that on July 22, 1999, correctional officers entered his cell and seized court orders he was preparing responses to, and one officer re…
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 Denial Of Access To Courts cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We grant Adolphus Ashley’s petition for writ of certiorari,1 finding that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it denied Ashley’s petition for writ of habeas corpus on grounds that the writ is properly used to determine the legality of a person’s restraint, and Ashley failed to allege or show he had exhausted administrative remedies.
Ashley alleged in his petition for writ of habeas corpus that on July 22, 1999, two correctional officers entered his cell and without authorization seized numerous court orders to which he was preparing time-sensitive responses. Ashley alleged that one of the officers refused his request for grievance forms to complain about this act.
The circuit court should have treated Ashley’s petition for habeas corpus as a petition for writ of mandamus. See Ashley v. Moore, 732 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Ordering respondent to show cause would resolve whether Ashley has been denied access to an administrative remedy. See, e.g., Ashley v. Moore, 746 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (quashing circuit court’s denial of petition for writ of habeas corpus and holding that Ashley had made a prima facie showing for granting mandamus to require the Department of Corrections to respond to six grievances he had filed).
The order denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus is
QUASHED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
ERVIN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR. . We construe Ashley's direct appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Torrence Windell Allen v. Moore, 871 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…should have treated Allen’s petition for habeas corpus as a petition for writ mandamus, and if facially sufficient, should have required the Department of Corrections to show cause with regard to the allegations in the petition. See Ashley v. Moore, 767 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Order of Dismissal QUASHED, case REMANDED. KAHN, WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Weeks v. State, 732 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Turner v. Turner, 746 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)