Roth v. Crosby, 2D03-1453.
| Decision Date | 24 September 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D03-1453.,2D03-1453. |
| Citation | 884 So.2d 407 |
| Parties | Joseph Henry ROTH, Appellant, v. James CROSBY, Secretary, Department of Corrections, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Joseph Henry Roth, pro se.
No appearance for Appellee.
Joseph Henry Roth is a prison inmate in the Polk Correctional Institution. In February 2000, the Florida Parole and Probation Commission (the Commission) established his presumptive parole release date as June 2, 2011, a date significantly later than the date recommended by the hearing examiner.
Roth sought review of the Commission's order by filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Circuit Court for Polk County.1 However, the appropriate vehicle for challenging a presumptive parole release date is a petition for a writ of mandamus directed against the Commission. Griffith v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 485 So.2d 818, 820 (Fla.1986) (). The mandamus petition must be filed in the Circuit Court for Leon County, where the Commission is headquartered, unless the home venue privilege is waived. Lewis v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 697 So.2d 965, 965 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). The circuit court correctly denied Roth's petition without prejudice for Roth to file a petition for a writ of mandamus directed against the Commission. Therefore, we affirm.2
Affirmed.
1. Our record is unclear as to whether Roth exhausted his administrative remedies pursuant to section 947.173, Florida Statutes (1999), which he was required to do before seeking review of the Commission's action in the circuit court. See Riddell v. Fla. Dep't of Corrections, 538 So.2d 132, 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
2. We do not treat Roth's timely filed notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari because appeal is the appropriate avenue for review of the circuit court's order in this case. Compare Green v. Moore, 777 So.2d 425, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (), with Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 720 So.2d 216, 217-18 (Fla.1998) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Fla. Parole Com'n
...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. Moore, 777 So.2d 425, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), and treat the petition as Jones' initial brief.We summarily ......
-
Baker v. Fla. Comm'n On Offender Review, Case No.: 3:16cv420/LAC/EMT
...is an accepted remedy for reviewing an order of the Florida Parole Commission.") (citations omitted); see also Roth v. Crosby, 884 So. 2d 407, 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (noting that a PPRD is challenged by petition for writ of mandamus against the Commission, filed in the Circuit Court in Leon......
-
Courtney v. Coonrod
...exhaustion of administrative remedies is required before seeking judicial review of an FPC decision or action. Roth v. Crosby, 884 So.2d 407, 408 n.1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (citations omitted). Administrative review of the Commission's establishment of an inmate's initial PPRD is obtained by th......
-
Roberts v. State
...1112 (Fla.2012); Franke v. State, 997 So.2d 424 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); Bizzell v. State, 912 So.2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Roth v. Crosby, 884 So.2d 407 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); State v. Broom, 523 So.2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Cannon v. State, 92 So.3d 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Branch v. State, 990......