CLAYTON WHISNER, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL W. MOORE, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plenary Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal from an order denying the appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus, the appellee, Department of Corrections, filed a Motion for an Order Construing this Action as an Original Certiorari Proceeding, pursuant to Sheley v. Florida Parole Commission, 703 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). Because the appellant is entitled to plenary review as to part of the order, we deny the motion.
Although a portion of the order before us reflects the circuit court’s appellate role in reviewing quasi-judicial action of the Department of Corrections, the order also involves an original disposition of constitutional claims over which the Department had no jurisdiction. Under Sheley, a portion of the order would be reviewable by the certiorari standard; nevertheless, the case should proceed as an appeal because the original disposition portion of the order is entitled to plenary review. The merits panel will be at liberty to apply a higher certiorari standard of review to the appropriate portion of the order. See Sheley, 703 So. 2d at 1205. Accordingly, the appel-lee’s Motion for an Order Construing this Action as an Original Certiorari Proceeding is denied. The action shall proceed as an appeal.
BARFIELD, KAHN, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Canete v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 967 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…ural grounds, finding that Canete’s claim was barred by the statute of limitations, and substantive grounds, finding that on the merits, he had nonetheless failed to demonstrate an entitlement to mandamus relief. In accordance with Whisner v. Moore, 825 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), we treat this proceeding as an appeal, although we apply the higher cer-tiorari standard of review to the portion of the order denying relief on the merits. Concluding that the circuit court erred in finding that Canete’s claim…
-
Mora v. McDONOUGH, 956 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…challenges a quasi-judicial ruling that was partially on procedural grounds and partially on the merits, it proceeds as an appeal, although this panel is free to apply the certiorari standard to its review of the merits ruling. See Whisner v. Moore, 825 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). The record shows that Appellant did not exhaust his administrative remedies, except as to the double jeopardy claim. Appellant has waived his challenge to the double jeopardy ruling by not raising it in the instant appeal. See…
-
Thomas v. State, 89 So. 3d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…inal agency action by the Florida Department of Corrections in prison disciplinary proceedings. He now challenges the circuit court’s final Order Dismissing in Part and Denying in Part his petition for writ of mandamus. Pursuant to Whisner v. Moore, 825 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), this proceeding is treated as an appeal of the circuit court’s dismissal of certain claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies but is reviewed under the higher certiorari standard for the denials on the merits of the…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 703 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)