FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, PETITIONER,
v.
CHARLES A. HUCKELBURY, 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 Florida Parole Commission challenged a circuit court order requiring it to reconsider its decision to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date. The appellate court held that the Parole Commission's discretionary parole decisions can only be set aside for demonstrated abuse of discretion, and found no such abuse here.
The circuit court lacked authority to direct reconsideration of the Parole Commission's decision because Huckelbury failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion. A parole denial may only be set aside upon showing the Commission deviated from legal requirements, based its decision on illegal grounds, or relied on improper considerations.
[1] A court may set aside a decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date only u…
[2] An abuse of discretion by the Parole Commission may be established by showing a deviation from legal requirements, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion.”
Establishes the standard of review for challenging parole decisions—requiring demonstration of abuse of discretion
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCharles A. Huckelbury's presumptive parole release date was suspended by the Florida Parole Commission, which deferred setting an effective parole rel…
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 Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We grant the Florida Parole Commission’s petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court’s order directing the Commission to reconsider setting an effective parole release date for Charles A. Huckelbury.
A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate’s presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission’s discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm’n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla.1985); see also Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). As we observed in Williams, an abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate’s complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm’n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla.1974). Here, Huckelbury did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision.
Accordingly, the circuit court’s order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith.
WEBSTER, DAVIS and LEWIS, 33., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Budry Michel, 257 So. 3d 3 (Fla. 2018)…eview. See Johnson v. Fla. Parole Comm'n , 841 So. 2d 615, 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (recognizing that the Parole Commission's final orders are reviewable in circuit court through an extraordinary writ petition); see also Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury , 903 So. 2d 977, 978 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (reviewing a circuit court's order on an inmate's petition challenging the suspension of a presumptive parole release date). Accordingly, if a Virginia juvenile life sentence subject to possible conditional geriatric releas…
-
Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Brown, 989 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…g an effective parole release date can be set aside by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission’s discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm’n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla.1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm’n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate’s complete record and to articu…
-
Franklin v. State, 141 So. 3d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…Fla. Parole Comm’n, 841 So. 2d 615, 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (recognizing that prisoners may seek review of final orders of the Parole Commission in circuit court through a petition for an extraordinary writ); Fla. [*213] Parole Comm’n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (reviewing a circuit court’s order on a petition challenging the suspension of an inmate’s PPRD). We opine only that the claim before the circuit court did not provide the information or arguments necessary to hold Appellant’s s…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rayfield Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974)
- Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985)
- Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)