Martin v. Florida Parole Com'n
| Decision Date | 13 March 2007 |
| Docket Number | No. 1D06-1935.,1D06-1935. |
| Citation | 951 So.2d 84 |
| Parties | Henry L. MARTIN, Appellant, v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Henry L. Martin, pro se, Appellant.
Kim Fluharty, General Counsel, and Bradley R. Bischoff, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Henry L. Martin appeals an order treating his petition for writ of habeas corpus as seeking non-habeas relief and denying that petition as untimely pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(c)(2). We reverse.
Martin was released to conditional release supervision in August 2003, but by order of December 15, 2004, the Florida Parole Commission revoked his supervision and he was returned to the custody of the Department of Corrections. By petition for writ of habeas corpus placed in the hands of prison officials for mailing on December 21, 2005, Martin challenged the revocation of his conditional release supervision and his continued incarceration pursuant thereto. Without issuing an order to show cause, the circuit court denied relief, finding that Martin's claim was more properly viewed as seeking certiorari review of the parole commission's revocation order, but was time-barred pursuant to the 30-day limitation established by rule 9.100(c)(2).
Rule 9.100(c)(2), upon which the circuit court relied, provides that "a petition to review quasi-judicial action of agencies, boards, and commissions of local government, which action is not directly appealable under any other provision of general law but may be subject to review by certiorari," shall be filed within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed. By its plain terms, the rule relates to the review of actions "of agencies, boards, and commissions of local government," and it is thus inapplicable to a claim challenging an action of the state agency. Moreover, Martin's challenge to the revocation of his conditional release supervision and his consequent incarceration was properly presented by petition for writ of habeas corpus, and the trial court further erred in converting the petition to one seeking non-habeas relief. 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 parole commission suggests that the trial court nonetheless reached the correct result in light of section 95.11(5)(f), Florida Statutes (2006), which provides that a petition for extraordinary writ other than one challenging a criminal conviction, filed on or on behalf of a prisoner, must be brought within one year. Thus, the commission contends that regardless of whether appellant's petition was properly filed as a habeas corpus action or a certiorari action, it was time-barred and the circuit court properly denied relief on procedural grounds. See Cooper v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 924 So.2d 966 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), review pending, No. SC06-1236 (Fla. June 21, 2006).
We find this reasoning to be flawed for two reasons. First, the legitimacy of applying section 95.11(5)(f) in this situation is questionable in light of Allen v. Butterworth, 756 So.2d 52 (Fla.2000), in which the court held that the legislature...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Fla. Parole Com'n
...its decision is in direct conflict with the decisions of the First and Second District Courts of Appeal in Martin v. Florida Parole Commission, 951 So.2d 84 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), and Carpenter v. Florida Parole Commission, 958 So.2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, §......
-
Jones v. Florida Parole Commission
...987 So.2d 229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Cooper, 924 So.2d at 967. As we did in Smith, we certify conflict with Martin v. Florida Parole Commission, 951 So.2d 84 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), rev. dismissed, 957 So.2d 635 (Fla.2007), and Carpenter v. Florida Parole Commission, 958 So.2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA R......
-
Smith v. Florida Parole Com'n
...for writ of habeas corpus that seeks review of an order revoking parole or conditional release supervision. Martin v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 951 So.2d 84 (Fla. 1st DCA), review dismissed, 957 So.2d 635 (Fla.2007); Carpenter v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 958 So.2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA We agree with the co......
-
Carpenter v. Florida Parole Commission
...by section 95.11(5)(f), Florida Statutes (2004), based on the reasoning set forth by the First District in Martin v. Florida Parole 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 ......