Arnett v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Arnett v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission

420 So. 2d 377, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28682

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 12, 1982

DocketNo. AL-320

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 420 So. 2d 377 (Arnett v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arnett v. Florida Parole & Probation Commission, 420 So. 2d 377, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28682 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

MILLS, Judge.

Arnett appeals Florida Parole and Probation Commission action establishing his presumptive parole release date. We affirm.

There is no ex post facto violation in applying the matrix in effect at the time of interview when the crime was committed prior to enactment of parole guidelines, Lopez v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 410 So.2d 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Britt v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 417 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Overfield v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 418 So.2d 321 (Fla. 1st DCA, 1982).

The sufficiency of the notice given Arnett before the amendment of the objective parole guidelines is an issue for rule challenge proceedings, Canter v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 409 So.2d 227 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

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