Cooper v. Florida Parole Commission, 4D05-2609.
| Citation | 924 So.2d 966 |
| Decision Date | 05 April 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D05-2609.,4D05-2609. |
| Parties | Marvin COOPER, Appellant, v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Okeechobee County; William L. Roby, Judge; L.T. Case No. 04-274 CA.
Marvin Cooper, Okeechobee, pro se.
Bradley R. Bischoff, Tallahassee, for appellee.
Marvin Cooper seeks review of the trial court's dismissal, as untimely, of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, in which he challenged the revocation of his conditional release supervision.1 Concluding that Cooper did not allege that he was entitled to immediate release should he prevail, the trial court treated his petition for writ of habeas corpus as a petition for writ of mandamus. The court then determined that the petition was untimely filed, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(c). Rule 9.100(c)(2) requires petitions challenging quasi-judicial actions to be filed within thirty days of rendition of the order to be reviewed.
Although the trial court incorrectly converted appellant's habeas petition into a mandamus petition, see Knowles v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 846 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Heard v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 811 So.2d 808 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), the court properly denied the petition as untimely. § 95.11(5)(f), Fla. Stat. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of the petition. However, we reverse the trial court's order imposing a lien on appellant's inmate trust account for filing fees. See Schmidt v. Crusoe, 878 So.2d 361 (Fla. 2003); Heard, 811 So.2d at 808-09; Thomas v. State, 904 So.2d 502 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); see also Cox v. Crosby, 31 Fla. L. Weekly D310, ___ So.2d ___, 2006 WL 176681 (Fla. 1st DCA Jan.26, 2006).
1. We initially redesignated Cooper's appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. However, based on our review of case law regarding the appropriate vehicle for seeking relief when the circuit court did not decide the prisoner's petition for review of administrative action on the merits, we have reverted to treating this matter as an appeal. See Gibson v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 895 So.2d 1291 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Roth v. Crosby, 884 So.2d 407, 408 n. 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Green v. Moore, 777 So.2d 425, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Fla. Parole Com'n
...57.085. Judicial history with regard to the application of this statute has been checkered. Previously, in Cooper v. Florida Parole Commission, 924 So.2d 966, 967 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), the Fourth District held that the trial court properly denied a petition for habeas corpus as untimely, rel......
-
Jones v. Florida Parole Commission
...of his parole, which occurred in 1990. We redesignate the certiorari proceeding as an appeal, see Cooper v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 924 So.2d 966, 967 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), rev. pending, No. SC06-1236 (Fla. June 21, 2006); Roth v. Crosby, 884 So.2d 407, 408 n. 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Green v.......
-
Smith v. Florida Parole Com'n
...order dismissing as untimely the petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging appellant's parole revocation. See Cooper v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 924 So.2d 966 (Fla. 4th DCA), review pending, No. SC06-1236 (Fla. June 21, 2006). We certify that today's decision, as well as Cooper, are in dire......
-
Carpenter v. Florida Parole Commission
...Commission, 951 So.2d 84 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). As did the First District in Martin, we certify conflict with Cooper v. Florida Parole Commission, 924 So.2d 966 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), on this issue. However, in addition to denying Carpenter's habeas petition on the timeliness issue, the trial c......