Granger v. Florida State Prison, AJ-232
| Decision Date | 05 January 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. AJ-232,AJ-232 |
| Citation | 424 So.2d 937 |
| Parties | Thomas GRANGER, Appellant, v. FLORIDA STATE PRISON and Bill Price, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Thomas Granger, pro se.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Harry F. Chiles, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellees.
Granger appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We reverse and remand.
While a prisoner at the Union Correctional Institution at Raiford, Granger was charged with the crime of battery on a law enforcement officer. As a result of this charge, he was transferred to the Florida State Prison where he was placed in close management confinement. Close management confinement is a subcategory of administrative confinement which is found only at Florida State Prison and which is reserved for inmates who present security risks. The placement of prisoners in close management confinement is authorized by section 33-3.081, Fla.Admin.Code (1981). After Granger was placed in close management confinement, he filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that the procedure by which he was transferred to close management confinement violated his right to due process of law. More specifically, Granger argued that his due process rights were violated by the State's failure to grant him a pre- or post-close management hearing as well as by the State's failure to advise him of the reasons why he was placed in close management confinement. The trial court denied Granger's petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing, citing Despres v. Strickland, 408 So.2d 1092 (Fla.1981), as authority.
On appeal, Granger contends that his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was sufficient to state a ground upon which relief could have been granted and that, therefore, the trial court erred in summarily dismissing the petition. The State contends that since the constitutionality of the procedure used in placing prisoners in close management confinement has already been upheld by the Florida Supreme Court in Depres, supra, the trial court did not commit error by dismissing Granger's petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing.
We first note that Despres cannot be cited as authority to support the denial of Granger's petition. In Despres, the Florida Supreme Court denied the petitioner's request for a writ of habeas corpus without issuing a written order or opinion. For this reason, Despres cannot be properly cited as authority for the proposition that section 33-3.081, Fla.Admin.Code, is constitutional.
The above notwithstanding, even assuming that section 33-3.081, Fla.Admin.Code, is constitutional, we believe that the trial court erred by summarily dismissing his petition. Section 33-3.081(5)(a), Fla.Admin.Code, provides that:
Any inmate placed in administrative confinement shall be given a hearing before the Senior Correctional Officer or the Classification Team.... The hearing shall be documented on a Report of Administrative Confinement, Form DC4-813. The inmate may present any facts or arguments relevant to his placement on administrative confinement.
Granger challenges not only the constitutionality of this section, he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Banks v. Jones
...then the underlying premise of Thompson was flawed.This court previously followed this same logic in Granger v. Florida State Prison, 424 So.2d 937 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), where we held that a prisoner possessed a liberty interest, created by state law, in remaining in the general population; ......
-
Searcy v. Singletary
...arbitrary transfers from the general prison population to disciplinary segregation." Id. at 875; see also Granger v. Florida State Prison, 424 So.2d 937, 938 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983) (Fla.Admin.Code § 33-3.081 (the predecessor to § 33-3.0081) created a "liberty interest in being free from arb......
-
Sheley v. Dugger
...arbitrary transfers from the general [prison] population to disciplinary segregation." Id. at 875; see also Granger v. Florida State Prison, 424 So.2d 937, 938 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983) (Fla.Admin.Code Sec. 33-3.081 (the predecessor to Sec. 33-3.0081) created a "liberty interest in being free ......
-
Williams v. Dugger
...value. Department of Legal Affairs v. District Court of Appeal, 5th District, 434 So.2d 310, 311 (Fla.1983); Granger v. Florida State Prison, 424 So.2d 937, 938 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Cummings v. State, 514 So.2d 406, 408 (Fla. 4th DCA In summary, in accordance with the rationale articulated ......