MOHAMED DANDASHI, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2007-05-16
No. 4D07-1297
FARMER, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.
956 So. 2d 528 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2007) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals an order denying his motion for clarification. In that motion, the defendant requested the trial court to require the Department of Corrections to give him proper credit for time served in jail. The trial court denied the motion because the defendant did not indicate that he had pursued his administrative' remedy with the Department of Corrections. We affirm the trial court’s order without prejudice to defendant’s ability to first exhaust his administrative remedies and then file a petition for writ of mandamus in the trial court, if necessary. See King v. State, 665 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Affirmed.

FARMER, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Faxas v. State, 975 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
    …without prejudice to appellant’s right to exhaust administrative remedies with the Department of Corrections, and thereafter, if unsatisfied with the results, to file a petition for writ of mandamus in the proper venue. See, e.g. Dandashi v. State, 956 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)(affirming trial court order denying motion for credit without prejudice to ap [*1270] pellant to first exhaust his administrative remedies with DOC, and then file for mandamus in the trial court if necessary); King v. State, 665…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw