DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHNNY AYALA AND STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENTS
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 Fifth District Court of Appeal granted the Department of Corrections' petition for certiorari, holding that a trial court violated the separation of powers doctrine by directing DOC to place a sentenced defendant at a specific prison facility, a matter within DOC's exclusive administrative authority.
A trial court lacks authority under the separation of powers doctrine to direct the Department of Corrections to place a sentenced defendant at a specific prison facility.
[1] A trial court violates the separation of powers doctrine by directing the Department of Corrections to place a sentenced defendant at a specific prison facility, as such…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJohnny Ayala was sentenced to eight years in prison, and the trial court's sentencing order directed the Department of Corrections to have Ayala serve…
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 Executive Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
The Department of Corrections (“DOC”) seeks certiorari review of a sentencing order that directs it to have the defendant below, Johnny Ayala, serve the initial part of his eight-year prison sentence at the “Avon Park Rehab Facility.” We grant the petition.
Certiorari jurisdiction extends to the review of a circuit court order that violates the separation • of powers doctrine. See Dep’t of Child. & Fams. v. K.R., 946 So.2d 106, 107 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (“Because we conclude that the order in question violates the separation of - powers doctrine, and thus departed from the essential requirements of law, we grant certiorari relief.”); Dep’t of Corr. v. Grubbs, 884 So.2d 1147, 1147 (Fla. 2d DQA 2004) (“DOC,.a nonparty to the criminal proceeding, filed a petition for writ of certiorari in this court seeking relief from the trial court’s order. We have jurisdiction because DOC’s non-party status deprives it of an adequate remedy-by direct appeal.”).
Here, the trial court’s order violates the separation of powers doctrine because the trial court lacked the authority to regulate the placement of a sentenced defendant in the prison system. See Dep’t of Corr. v. Mikle, 855 So.2d 1279, 1280 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003); Singletary v. Acosta, 659 So.2d 449, 450 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Accordingly, we grant DOC’s petition for writ of certiorari, 'quash the trial court’s September 28, 2015, sentencing order, and remand for resen-tencing.
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIO-RARI GRANTED.
WALLIS and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Dep't OF Corr. v. Grubbs, 884 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Howard v. State, 659 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Singletary v. Acosta, 659 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Dep't OF Child. & Families v. K.R., 946 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
- State v. Daron Mikle, 855 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)