KENNETH JAMES KENDRICK, PETITIONER,
v.
WALTER A. MCNEIL, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 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.
Kendrick, an inmate placed in close management status, sought habeas corpus relief but the circuit court improperly converted his petition to mandamus and assessed a filing fee. The appellate court held that inmates challenging close management placement may proceed via habeas corpus without fees, vacated the fee-related orders, but upheld the underlying placement decision.
An inmate seeking release from close management back into the general prison population is entitled to proceed through a petition for writ of habeas corpus, and no filing fee may be assessed in a true habeas corpus proceeding. The circuit court erred in converting the habeas petition to mandamus and assessing fees.
[1] A petition for writ of habeas corpus is the proper remedy for an inmate seeking release from close management status back into the general prison population.
[2] No filing fee may be assessed in a true habeas corpus proceeding.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“This Court has consistently held that an inmate who seeks release from close management back into the general prison population is entitled to proceed through a petition for writ of habeas corpus.”
Establishes the proper procedural remedy for challenging close management placement
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKendrick was involved in an altercation with another inmate and received a disciplinary sanction for fighting. The institutional classification team r…
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 Administrative Remedies cases and more on FLexlaw
By petition for writ of certiorari, Kenneth James Kendrick seeks review of an order of the circuit court which treated his habeas corpus petition as a mandamus petition and denied it on its merits. We have jurisdiction in accordance with Sheley v. Florida Parole Commission, 720 So.2d 216 (Fla.1998). For the reasons set forth below, we grant the petition in part and deny it in part.
*658Kendrick and another inmate were involved in an altercation. Kendrick received a disciplinary sanction for fighting and shortly thereafter the institutional classification team recommended that he be placed on close management I status. After a hearing, the team so ordered and the state classification officer approved the action. After unsuccessfully exhausting his administrative remedies, Kendrick sought relief by filing a habeas corpus petition in the Circuit Court for Leon County. That court entered an order which determined that mandamus, not ha-beas corpus, was the proper remedy. A filing fee was therefore assessed and a lien imposed on Kendrick’s trust account pursuant to section 57.085(5), Florida Statutes, when it was made to appear that Kendrick was indigent. Kendrick’s motions challenging these decisions were denied and the case proceeded to a determination on the merits. The court found that Kendrick had failed to show entitlement to relief with regard to his placement in close management and the petition was denied.
This Court has consistently held that an inmate who seeks release from close management back into the general prison population is entitled to proceed through a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See Ashley v. Moore, 732 So.2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Norris v. Dep’t of Corrections, 721 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Taylor v. Perrin, 654 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Guess v. Barton, 599 So.2d 770 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Roy v. Dugger, 592 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Thompson v. Dugger, 509 So.2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); see also Holland v. State, 791 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). No filing fee may be assessed in a true habeas corpus proceeding. See Art. I, § 13, Fla. Const.; Bocharski v. Circuit Court of Second Judicial Circuit, 552 So.2d 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). The circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law by converting the habe-as corpus petition to mandamus. It should have determined whether it was the proper court to consider the petition for writ of habeas corpus under Murray v. Regier, 872 So.2d 217 (Fla.2002) and thereafter proceeded to resolve the case on its merits or transfer it. We therefore grant the petition in part and direct that all orders of the circuit court placing a lien on Kendrick’s trust account to recover fees for the circuit court proceeding or for this review proceeding be vacated and any funds taken from his trust account pursuant to a lien issued in this case be refunded to him. We otherwise deny the certio-rari petition, finding no basis to overturn the Department’s placement of Kendrick in close management.
Petition GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robert E. Banks v. Jones, 197 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…which was challenged by petition for writ of mandamus in the Circuit Court for Leon County, must be considered by petition for writ of habeas- corpus in the Circuit Court for Santa-Rosa County in which prisoner was incarcerated); Kendrick v. McNeil, 6 So. 3d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (citing precedent dating back to 1987 holding that circuit court improperly treated claims challenging Close Management classification as arising in mandamus rather than habeas corpus, and ordering that hens placed on inmate’s ac…1 / 4
-
Magwood v. Tucker, 98 So. 3d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…order. This appeal follows. “This Court has consistently held that an inmate who seeks release from close management back into the general prison population is entitled to proceed through a petition for writ of habeas corpus.” Kendrick v. McNeil, 6 So. 3d 657, 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). The proper circuit court venue for such a petition is in the county where the inmate is incarcerated. Harvard v. Singletary, 733 So. 2d 1020, 1024 n. 4 (Fla.1999). Because appellant clearly sought release from close managem…
-
Robert E. Banks v. Jones, 232 So. 3d 963 (Fla. 2017)…ions of this court which hold that challenges to Close Management housing assignments may be asserted by petition for writ of habeas corpus.” Banks, 197 So. 3d at 1155 (citing Magwood v. Tucker, 98 So. 3d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Kendrick v. McNeil, 6 So. 3d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Thompson v. Dugger, 509 So. 2d 391, 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)). The First District certified conflict with Holland.2 Banks sought review in this Court, which we granted. MOOTNESS The Department argues that because Banks has bee…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (13 total)
- Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 720 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 1998)
- Murray v. Regier, 872 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 2002)
- Bocharski v. The Cir. Court OF the Second Jud. Cir., 552 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Weeks v. State, 732 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Thompson v. Dugger, 509 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Guess v. Barton, 599 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Holland v. State, 791 So. 2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Mosley v. State, 654 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Taylor v. Perrin, 654 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Campbell v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 592 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)