VAN LEE HOLLEY, PETITIONER,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, FLORIDA DIVISION 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.
In this mandamus/habeas corpus proceeding, the Florida Supreme Court held that a prison director improperly calculated a prisoner's release date by failing to properly sequence consecutive sentences following a parole revocation. The court ordered recalculation of the petitioner's sentences consistent with its prior decisions in Brumit v. Wainwright and Benyard v. Wainwright.
The respondent improperly calculated the release date. The petitioner's total time to be served must be recalculated by making the Orange County sentence consecutive to prior sentences for which parole was revoked, with the 1971 five-year sentence consecutive and calculated at the expiration of both the Orange County sentence and the sentence pursuant to the parole revocation.
[1] A writ of mandamus may be treated as an original petition for habeas corpus when the petitioner alleges improper computation of a release date.
[2] A sentence for attempted robbery entered after parole revocation is consecutive to prior sentences for which parole was revoked.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“The petitioner's total time to be served should be recalculated, making the Orange County sentence consecutive to prior sentences for which parole was revoked.”
Establishes the core holding regarding proper sequencing of consecutive sentences after parole revocation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner Holley received multiple sentences over several years: a 6-month to 1-year sentence in 1965 for escape, a 10-year sentence in 1965 for robb…
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 Parole Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
By petition for writ of mandamus, which we treat as an original petition for habeas corpus, petitioner alleges that the respondent, Louie L. Wainwright, has improperly computed his Release date. The chronological events of petitioner’s sentences for separate criminal actions and parole revocations are as follows.
(1) A six-month to one-year sentence entered by the Circuit Court, Volusia County, Florida, on February 18, 1965, for the crime of escape. There is no former sentence to which this sentence may be consecutive.
(2) A ten-year sentence entered by the Criminal Court of Record, Duval County, Florida, on June 3, 1965, for the crime of robbery.
(3) A one-year sentence entered by the Criminal Court of Record, Duval County, Florida, on January 19, 1967, for the crime of breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, consecutive to the aforementioned sentence for escape.
(4) Petitioner was paroled on April 29, 1969, from the aforementioned sentences he was serving.
(5) A three-year sentence entered by the Criminal Court of Record, Orange County, Florida, on October 26, 1970, for the crime of attempted robbery. This sentence is consecutive to the sentences imposed for prior offenses, pursuant to Section 921.16, Florida Statutes (1969), which was then applicable.
(6) Petitioner’s parole was revoked on November 19, 1970, which revocation stated :
“This revocation is to be effective upon expiration of the sentence which parolee is now serving in the Florida State Prison under number B-014087; namely, a sentence of three years in the State Prison by the Criminal Court for Orange County, Florida, on October 26, 1970.”
(7) A five-year sentence consecutive to the sentences then being served by petitioner entered by the Criminal Court of Record, Duval County, on December 22, 1971, for the crime of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony.
Our opinions in Brumit v. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 39 (Fla.1974), and Benyard v. Wainwright, 322 So. 2d 473 (Fla.1975), are controlling. The petitioner’s total time to be served should be recalculated, making the Orange County sentence consecutive to prior sentences for which parole was revoked. The five-year sentence referred to in Item (7) imposed on December 22, 1971, is consecutive and must be calculated at the expiration of both the Orange County sentence and the sentence pursuant to the revocation of parole.
Respondent is directed to comply with the recalculation of the petitioner’s sentences in accordance with this opinion, and the writ is hereby discharged.
ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, ENGLAND and SUNDBERG, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bertone v. State, 388 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…e note that Distillator construed a federal law pertaining to the execution of parole violation warrants and is inapplicable to the instant proceedings under Florida law. Tereul v. Wainwright, 328 So. 2d 199 (Fla. 1976) and Holley v. Wainwright, 326 So. 2d 411 (Fla.1976) have construed Florida Statutes to mandate that a second sentence, entered in regard to a different information or indictment; shall run consecutively to a prior sentence unless the trial judge specifically orders the sentence to run conc…
Authorities Cited
- Benyard v. Louie L. Wainwright, 322 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1975)
- Brumit v. Louie L. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 1973)