Alberson v. Durocher

677 So. 2d 113, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8267, 1996 WL 431162
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 2, 1996·No. No. 95-2580·Published

Opinion

W. SHARP, Judge.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of Alber-son’s petition for a writ of mandamus on the ground that the petition fails to show he exhausted all grievance or administrative procedures to obtain copies of his presen-tence investigative report. Duggan v. Department of Corrections, 665 So.2d 1152 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Washington v. State, 662 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). Further, we note the Department of Corrections must be added or substituted as the proper party, [114] since it appears the Department rather than the Office of the Public Defender (Durocher) is in possession of the presentence investigative report. See 35 Fla. Jur.2d, Mandamus & Prohibition § 104. Our affirmance is without prejudice to resubmit a proper petition for mandamus to the trial court. See Scalf v. Singletary, 618 So.2d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, J., concurs. GRIFFIN, J., concurs in result only.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alberson v. Durocher, 677 So. 2d 113, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8267, 1996 WL 431162 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

677 So. 2d 113 (Alberson v. Durocher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Washington v. State
662 So. 2d 1027 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Duggan v. Department of Corrections
665 So. 2d 1152 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Scalf v. Singletary
618 So. 2d 368 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)