Bacallao v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bacallao v. State

41 So. 3d 988, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11274, 2010 WL 3023275

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 4, 2010

Docket3D10-1644

StatusPublished

This text of 41 So. 3d 988 (Bacallao v. State) 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

Bacallao v. State, 41 So. 3d 988, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11274, 2010 WL 3023275 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The denial of Appellant’s Rule 3.800(a) motion is affirmed without prejudice to the extent Appellant is challenging the Florida Parole Commission’s determination of his release date. Appellant may file a proper petition in the appropriate jurisdiction. See Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 720 So .2d 216, 217 (Fla.1998) (“[A Petition for Writ of] Mandamus is an accepted remedy for reviewing an order of the Florida Parole Commission.”).

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

PER CURIAM.

The denial of Appellant’s Rule 3.800(a) motion is affirmed without prejudice to the extent Appellant is challenging the Florida Parole Commission’s determination of his release date. Appellant may file a proper petition in the appropriate jurisdiction. See Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 720 So .2d 216, 217 (Fla.1998) (“[A Petition for Writ of] Mandamus is an accepted remedy for reviewing an order of the Florida Parole Commission.”).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 So. 3d 988, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 11274, 2010 WL 3023275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bacallao-v-state-fladistctapp-2010.