JAMES TILDEN PORTER, PETITIONER,
v.
H. G. COCHRAN, JR., DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT
JAMES TILDEN PORTER, PETITIONER,
H. G. COCHRAN, JR., DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT
123 So. 2d 465
Florida Supreme Court (1960)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
The court has re-examined the petition for writ of habeas corpus and has studied the return of the respondent. It now appears that the petitioner agreed over his signature “to proceed with a hearing on the charges of parole violation without an attorney and before only one member of the Parole Commission(Italics supplied.) This representation to the Parole Commissioner is completely out of harmony with the representation, or rather misrepresentation, made by the petitioner to this court.
It is, therefore, ordered that he remain in custody and that the writ of habeas corpus issued in his behalf be discharged.
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOBSON, ROBERTS and DREW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gibbs v. Cochran, 142 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 1962)…ioners, a procedure we have disapproved. But we have since remanded prisoners to custody when it appeared that they had waived the right to a hearing before more than one commissioner on the question of revocation of parole. Porter v. Cochran, Fla., 123 So. 2d 465, Sumrall v. Cochran, Fla., 127 So. 2d 447. In the instant case the petitioner alleged that he was heard before only one commissioner, however, the record submitted by the Attorney General shows that the petitioner signed an agreement that the hearin…
-
Alton Mitchell v. Louie L. Wainwright, 155 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 1963)…tion on a subsequent original application by the same petitioner. The judgment of the circuit court becomes absolute unless reviewed by the appropriate appellate court [*870] in a direct appellate proceeding-. State ex rel. Parker v. Reynolds, Fla., 123 So. 2d 465. We .must also dispose of the petitioner’s attempt to justify bringing this second proceeding here. He asserts that “in complying with Criminal Rule No. 1 [he] has exhausted his fundamental procedure (sic) rights in the Circuit Court of Bay County…