Thompson v. Dugger, BQ-59
| Decision Date | 07 July 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. BQ-59,BQ-59 |
| Citation | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1631,509 So.2d 391 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1631 Michael THOMPSON, Appellant, v. Richard L. DUGGER, et al., Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Michael Thompson, pro se, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Walter M. Meginniss, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a denial of the appellant's petition for writ of habeas corpus. We reverse.
Appellant, an inmate at Florida State Prison, makes the following allegations in his petition for writ of habeas corpus which was summarily denied without an evidentiary hearing. He was placed in segregated confinement for possession of a weapon. While on segregated confinement, he received a notice from the Close Management Team 1 indicating that "classification status will be reviewed by the close management team with the following status change recommended: CM/I due to possession of a weapon on July 22, 1984." After review, appellant was not placed on Close Management Status, but returned to the general prison population. A few days later, he was found guilty of disciplinary violation for cursing a guard. After notice and a hearing, he was again placed in segregated confinement. While in this confinement, he received the following notice:
Your classification status will be ... reviewed by the Close Management Assignment Team, with the following status change recommended ...: Assignment To Close Management I Status.
A hearing was held after which the Close Management Team determined that based on thirteen disciplinary reports being filed within the last twenty-six months and because of appellant's assaultive nature, he would be placed on close management status. Appellant filed an administrative grievance which was denied and filed the instant habeas petition.
Although an inmate has no constitutional due process right to notice and a hearing before his confinement status is changed, such right may be created by state law. Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460, 103 S.Ct. 864, 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983). In Florida, Rule 33-3.0083(4)(a), Florida Administrative Code (1986), entitles the inmate to notice of the charges against him and an opportunity to be heard prior to being placed on Close Management Status. See Bean v. Dugger, 475 So.2d 729 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In the present case, the only notice apparent from the petition and attachments does not provide any indication of the charges against appellant. Rather,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Banks v. Jones
...as no fee could be charged for filing petition for writ of habeas corpus, but otherwise denying certiorari relief); Thompson v. Dugger, 509 So.2d 391, 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (“Although an inmate has no constitutional due process right to notice and a hearing before his confinement status i......
-
Banks v. Jones
...(citing Magwood v. Tucker, 98 So.3d 725 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) ; Kendrick v. McNeil, 6 So.3d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) ; Thompson v. Dugger, 509 So.2d 391, 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) ).The First District certified conflict with Holland.2 Banks sought review in this Court, which we granted.MOOTNESS ......
-
Kendrick v. McNeil, 1D08-1296.
...1st DCA 1995); Guess v. Barton, 599 So.2d 770 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Roy v. Dugger, 592 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Thompson v. Dugger, 509 So.2d 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); see also Holland v. State, 791 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). No filing fee may be assessed in a true habeas corpus p......