THOMAS PERRY WELLS, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES HARRIS, WARDEN, MARTIN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, AND JEAN SAGER, LIBRARIAN, MARTIN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, APPELLEES
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 trial court erred in dismissing the declaratory judgment action challenging the constitutionality of a rule without allowing the petitioner to address the issue.
Appellant, a prisoner, challenged disciplinary action and the constitutionality of the rule under which he was disciplined. The trial court denied man…
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 Petition For Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We treat this petition for certiorari as a notice of appeal. Appellant filed a petition for writ of mandamus and declaratory judgment in the trial court against the warden of the institution in which he is serving a prison sentence and one of its employees, challenging disciplinary action against him and seeking declaratory judgment that the rule under which he was disciplined is unconstitutional. The trial court denied the petition for writ of mandamus as to the disciplinary action and dismissed the declaratory action.
In Smith v. Florida Department of Corrections, 752 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), a prisoner filed a petition for writ of mandamus/declaratory judgment challenging through declaratory judgment, as petitioner does here, the constitutionality of the rule under which he was disciplined, as well as the disciplinary action itself. The trial court dismissed the petition for declaratory judgment. The First District reversed, finding that the trial court erred in dismissing the declaratory judgment portion of the petition attacking the validity of the rule itself without providing Smith with the opportunity to address the issue. 752 So. 2d at 60. It held that where the petition stated a cause of action for declaratory judgment, it was error for the court to make a final determination as to the disciplinary action before hearing the prisoners challenge to the validity of the rule under which he was disciplined. Id.
Smith applies to this case. The order of the trial court is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
WARNER, STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. McDONOUGH, 955 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…tment of Corrections has its headquarters. The trial court entered the order transferring venue without affording Smith any notice or opportunity to be heard. The Department has confessed error based on this procedural ground. See Wells v. Harris, 884 So. 2d 1030, 1031 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Burns, 672 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Hewitt Contracting v. Joyner, 616 So. 2d 190, 190-91 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); Morris-Edge Masonry, Inc. v. Tonn & Blank, Inc., 461 So. 2d 1036, 1037 (F…
Authorities Cited
- Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 752 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)