RICHARD DOSS, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT 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.
The court held that the circuit court's denial of a writ of mandamus was proper, as it neither violated due process nor departed from the essential requirements of law.
Richard Doss sought a writ of mandamus to challenge an administrative decision revoking his accrued gain time due to a prison disciplinary violation. …
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 Essential Requirements Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Richard Doss seeks review of a circuit court order that summarily denied his petition for writ of mandamus. In his petition before the circuit court, he had sought relief from an administrative decision that revoked fifteen days of his accrued gain time on a finding that he had committed a violation of prison disciplinary rules.
While this case was pending, the Florida Supreme Court announced its decision in Sheley v. Florida Parole Commission, 720 So. 2d 216 (Fla.1998), which held that a prisoner who has received a full review in the circuit court of a Parole Commission order is not entitled to a second plenary appeal. She-ley goes on to limit review in the district court to consideration of whether the circuit court denied the prisoner due process of law or departed from the essential requirements of the law.
We recognize that the decision in this case was not rendered by the Parole Commission, but we find that the reasoning in Sheley applies equally to decisions of the Department of Corrections on disciplinary violations. We, therefore, treat this case as a certiorari review pursuant to Sheley. Having found that the circuit court neither committed any due process violation nor departed from the essential requirements of the law, we deny the petition.
STEVENSON, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brooks v. State, 787 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 2001)…)(e), statements must be made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy. Florida courts have consistently held that for purposes of section 90.803(18)(e), a conspiracy ordinarily ends when the crime has been committed. See, e.g., Calvert v. State, 730 So. 2d 316, 319 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Burnside v. State, 656 So. 2d 241, 245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Usher v. State, 642 So. 2d 29, 31 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Moore v. State, 503 So. 2d 923, 924 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Wells v. State, 492 So. 2d 712, 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 19…
-
Allen v. State, 137 So. 3d 946 (Fla. 2013)…Fla. 2003). Even if this argument had been preserved, the claim is without merit. In order to be admitted as an admission of a party, the statement must be made while the conspiracy is in existence and before it is terminated. See Calvert v. State, 730 So. 2d 316, 319 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (noting that statements made after conspiracy had ended were inadmissible under section 90.803(18)(e)); see also Brooks v. State, 787 So. 2d 765, 772 (Fla.2001). Even assuming the existence of a conspiracy between Allen and…
-
Gundlah v. Moore, 831 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…was to expire. Allegedly unfamiliar with the procedures to appeal, he was unable to file the writ of mandamus until after the thirty-day deadline had passed.1 We treat his appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Doss v. Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 730 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). We find no error in the circuit court’s denial of the petition for writ of mandamus as untimely. A claimant’s failure to challenge an order of the Department of Corrections within thirty days of its rendition produces a jurisdi…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 720 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 1998)