AUTLEY MOBLEY, PETITIONER,
v.
JAMES R. MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Collateral Criminal Proceeding cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner’s argument that the circuit court erred in denying his petition for writ of mandamus is without merit and is rejected. But because the underlying action constitutes a “collateral criminal proceeding” pursuant to section 57.085(10), Florida Statutes (2005), the circuit court improperly imposed a lien upon petitioner’s inmate trust account for payment of court costs and fees. See Cox v. Crosby, 31 Fla. L. Weekly D310, — So. 2d -, 2006 WL 176681(Fla. 1st DCA Jan.26, 2006), rev. granted sub nom., McDonough v. Cox, 924 So. 2d 809 (Fla.2006); Schmidt v. Crusoe, 878 So. 2d 361 (Fla.2003). We accordingly quash that portion of the circuit court’s June 30, 2005, order on indigency imposing a lien as a result of petitioner’s filing of the petition for writ of mandamus. The circuit court should direct the reimbursement of any funds that have been withdrawn from petitioner’s account to satisfy the improper lien order. The petition is DENIED as to the challenge to the order by which the circuit court denied mandamus relief, but we QUASH that portion of the indigency order which imposed a lien.
ERVIN, ALLEN, and WOLF, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
King v. Parker Hannifin Corp. & Underwriters, Inc., 17 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…rrier to show cause why the court should not enter a writ of execution or otherwise enforce the terms of a JCC’s final order. A JCC’s order is final when the order “settles all the claims ripe for adjudication.” Mabire v. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co., 946 So. 2d 40, 42 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). The Claimant argues that the JCC’s October 4, 2007, order was final because it settled all the claims ripe for adjudication with respect to the PFB at issue. The Claimant relies in large part on the First District’s decisio…
-
Zurich Am. INS. Co. v. Samson, 331 So. 3d 1234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)…t DCA 2012). But the JCC does not have jurisdiction to enforce its final orders because the circuit court has sole jurisdiction over enforcement proceedings under section 440.24(1). See King, 17 So. 3d at 787; Mabire v. St. Paul Guardian Ins. Co., 946 So. 2d 40, 42 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Frank v. Crawford & Co., 670 So. 2d 117, 118 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Metro. Dade County v. Rolle, 661 So. 2d 124, 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). - 5 - Section 440.24(1) provides for enforcement of final orders2 of the JCC via petiti…
Authorities Cited
- Schmidt v. Crusoe, 878 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 2003)
- McDonough v. Cox, 924 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 2006)