HORACE WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.850 Motion For Post-Conviction Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
The denial of appellant’s rule 3.850 motion is affirmed. Nevertheless, based on the date of appellant’s offenses, it appears he is in fact eligible for parole. See Duffy v. State, 874 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Hurd v. State, 807 So.2d 753, 754 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Johnson v. State, 679 So.2d 9 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Dolan v. State, 618 So.2d 271, 272 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Although he has no absolute right to parole, he is entitled to proper consideration for parole. See Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm’n, 289 So.2d 719, 720 (Fla. 1974). As a result, our affirmance is without prejudice for appellant to pursue any available administrative remedies or if he has exhausted his administrative remedies to petition the circuit court for a writ of mandamus. See Oishi v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm’n, 418 So.2d 329 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Greer v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm’n, 403 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
GROSS, C.J., POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Rayfield Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974)
- Dolan v. State, 618 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Greer v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 403 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Donnell Johnson v. State, 679 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- Leaurenza Edwards v. State, 874 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Oishi v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 418 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Powell v. State, 807 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Hurd v. State, 807 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Duffy v. State, 874 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)