L. T. HANKS, PETITIONER,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, 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.
Inmate's habeas corpus petition challenging forfeiture of gain-time without notice or hearing following escape conviction is denied because Florida Supreme Court previously upheld the constitutionality of the statute permitting such forfeiture based on judicial determination of guilt.
Forfeiture of gain-time following escape conviction without notice or hearing satisfies due process where the inmate received a judicial determination of guilt in the escape proceeding.
[1] Judicial determination of guilt in escape conviction provides sufficient due process to satisfy Wolff v. …
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 intelligence“the Division, without notice or hearing, to declare a forfeiture of all gain-time earned by the prisoner prior to escape following his conviction for escape”
Description of statutory authority under Section 944.28(1) (1977)
Hanks, an inmate serving consecutive five-year sentences for two escape convictions, had his accumulated gain-time forfeited without notice or hearing…
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 Wolff V. Mcdonnell Procedural Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Hanks, an inmate, petitions for writ of habeas corpus. He is serving consecutive five year sentences for two escape convictions. His accumulated gain-time was taken away without notice or hearing due to those convictions. He contends he was denied due process as afforded by Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 94 S.Ct. 2963, 41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974). The state merely responds by quoting Section 944.28(1) (1977), which permits the Division, without notice or hearing, to declare a forfeiture of all gain-time earned by the prisoner prior to escape following his conviction for escape.
Despite the intriguing question raised by petitioner and the inadequate return by the state, we are compelled to deny the petition. The Florida Supreme Court in Morgan v. Cook, 344 So. 2d 577 (Fla.1977) considered the same point and found 944.28(1) constitutional, relying on Rankin v. Wainwright, 351 F.Supp. 1306 (M.D.Fla.1972). Our review of the record in Morgan v. Cook shows petitioner pled guilty and was sentenced to six months for his escape. Although the rationale is not set out in the opinion, apparently the Supreme Court found the judicial determination of guilt in the escape attempt was sufficient due process for the forfeiture of gain-time.
The petition is DENIED.
MILLS, A. C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wright v. Louie L. Wainwright, 359 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…or parole, as the case may be. The Florida Supreme Court recently held that Section 944.28(1) does not offend constitutionally guaranteed due process rights. Morgan v. Cook, 344 So. 2d 577 (Fla.1977), followed by this court in Hanks v. Wainwright, 360 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st. DCA 1978). Moreover, the statute’s express provision for forfeiture without notice or hearing forecloses any hearing remedy Wright might otherwise have under Section 120.57, Florida Statutes (1977), as a person whose substantial interests…
-
Brown v. State, 375 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…hether they could have sought administrative review. Lightfoot v. Wainwright, 369 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Swarez v. Wainwright, 363 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Bagley v. Brierton, 362 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Hanks v. Wainwright, 360 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).2 Appellant has a constitutional right to collateral relief which cannot be foreclosed by failure to seek direct judicial review. Cf. Young v. State, 177 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965) (failure to appeal conviction in criminal ca…
Authorities Cited
- Wolff v. McDONNELL, 418 U.S. 539 (U.S. 1974)
- Morgan v. Al Cook, 344 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1977)