EDDIE WELDON, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 5th DCA | 2002-12-13

No. 5D02-2479

PETERSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

831 So. 2d 1252 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2002) Positive Treatment

Cited by 5 cases

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.

Holding

The court held that the lower court should have allowed the inmate time to file a reply to the Commission's response before reconsidering the matter.

Facts & Procedural History

An incarcerated inmate filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his presumptive parole evidence date and other issues related to his sen…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Gain Time Forfeiture Parole Revocation Concurrent Sentences Mandamus

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Gain Time Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

COBB, J.

The appellant, Eddie Weldon, while incarcerated pursuant to various convictions, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on March 18, 2002, in the circuit court for Marion County. Wilson was challenging the presumptive parole evidence date set by the Florida Parole Commission. He asserted: (1) that the Commission had no jurisdiction over sentences imposed under the sentencing guidelines; (2) the Commission had no authority to aggravate for concurrent sentences (that were formerly consecutive sentences); and (3) that the Florida Department of Corrections erred in the forfeiture of gain time on allegedly expired sentences following his parole revocation.

The circuit court denied Weldon’s petition relating to the Florida Parole Commission based upon a finding that mandamus, not habeas corpus, was the proper remedy and that, in any event, he was entitled to no relief from the Commission. Following denial of a motion for rehearing, Weldon filed the instant appeal.

The Commission acknowledged that the lower court should have afforded Weldon 20 days in which to file a reply to its response to the show cause order of the circuit court. Fla. R.App. P. 9.100(k). Therefore, in accordance with the concession of the Commission, we remand this cause to the lower court to allow Weldon to file and serve his reply to the Commission’s response and to reconsider this matter after compliance with the rule.

REMAND.

PETERSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

State v. Reedy, 862 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)

…prepare for argument because he had just been confronted with the defense arguments, the trial court dismissed the grand theft count. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(a) requires that a motion to dismiss be in writing. State v. Alexander, 831 So. 2d 1252 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); State v. Pope, 674 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Moreover, rule 3.060 requires that notice of a hearing concerning a written motion that may not be heard ex parte shall be served on the adverse party “a reasonable time” before t…
State v. Delcia Maria Suazo, 973 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)

…[*1274] be in writing. This court has repeatedly held that it is improper for a trial court to dismiss charges when the defendant has not filed a written motion to dismiss. State v. Reedy, 862 So. 2d 941, 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); State v. Alexander, 831 So. 2d 1252, 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); State v. Pope, 674 So. 2d 901, 901 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). These cases hold that the remedy for the improper dismissal is reversal and remand for further proceedings. Reedy, 862 So. 2d at 942; Alexander, 831 So. 2d at 1253; Pop…
State v. A. J., 255 So. 3d 891 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)

…against A.J. was vested solely in the State. See Brosky, 79 So. 3d at 135. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. See Suazo, 973 So. 2d at 1274 (first citing - 5 - Reedy, 862 So. 2d at 942; then citing State v. Alexander, 831 So. 2d 1252, 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); and then citing State v. Pope, 674 So. 2d 901, 901 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)). Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. LaROSE, C.J., and LUCAS, J., Concur.…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.