WILLIAM J. MILNE
v.
MARK S. INCH, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
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.
A mandamus petition challenging forfeiture of gain time that is filed more than 30 days after the final disposition of a disciplinary proceeding must be dismissed as untimely, but a trial court may not impose a lien on an inmate's trust account for court costs in such collateral criminal proceedings.
[1] A mandamus petition challenging the forfeiture of gain time filed more than 30 days after the final disposition of a disciplinary proceeding must be dismissed as untimely…
[2] Claims brought by an inmate that, if successful, will directly affect the length of incarceration are collateral criminal proceedings not subject to lien provisions under…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“Claims brought by an inmate 'that, if successful, will directly affect the length of time the inmate will actually spend in prison' are collateral criminal proceedings which are not subject to the lien provisions in section 57.085, Florida Statutes (2018).”
Court's explanation of why the lien was improper
William J. Milne, a state inmate, filed a mandamus petition seeking reinstatement of gain time forfeited after he was found to have committed battery …
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 Collateral Criminal Proceeding cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
WILLIAM J. MILNE, Appellant, v. No. 1D20-1201
MARK S. INCH, Secretary, Department of Corrections, Appellee.
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. Kevin J. Carroll, Judge.
January 12, 2021
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, a state inmate, challenges the denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus. In his petition, Appellant sought the reinstatement of gain time forfeited after Appellant was found to have committed a battery on another inmate. The circuit court did not err in dismissing the petition as untimely filed. See Whitfield v. Dep't. of Corr., 107 So. 3d 1210, 1212 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (holding that “a mandamus petition filed more than 30 days after the final disposition of a disciplinary proceeding must be dismissed").
However, the circuit court erred in ordering a lien on Appellant's inmate trust account for court costs and fees for filing
the petition challenging the forfeiture of gain time. See McNeil v. Cox, 997 So. 2d 343, 348 (Fla. 2008); Schmidt v. Crusoe, 878 So. 2d 361, 367 (Fla. 2003); Scott v. McDonough, 946 So. 2d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Claims brought by an inmate "that, if successful, will directly affect the length of time the inmate will actually spend in prison” are collateral criminal proceedings which are not subject to the lien provisions in section 57.085, Florida Statutes (2018). McNeil, 997 So. 2d at 348 (quoting Schmidt, 878 So. 2d at 366); see also § 57.085(10). Thus, we vacate the circuit court's order imposing the lien, and we remand with instructions that the trial court direct that Appellant be reimbursed for any funds removed from his account pursuant to the order. Because this is a ministerial action, Appellant need not be present.
AFFIRMED, in part, and REVERSED, in part.
RAY, C.J., and BILBREY and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.