BOBBY J. NAPIER v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 1, 2020·No. 20-0065·Published

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

BOBBY J. NAPIER,

Appellant,

v.

FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Appellees.

No. 4D20-65

[April 1, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; John S. Kastrenakes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2019-CA- 010964-XXXX-MB.

Bobby J. Napier, Pahokee, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Duncan v. Moore, 754 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 2000) (recognizing that the conditional release statute does not violate the double jeopardy, due process, or ex post facto clauses); Fleming v. State, 697 So. 2d 1322 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (acknowledging that there is no entitlement to credit for time spent on conditional release).

LEVINE, C.J., GROSS and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

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

BOBBY J. NAPIER v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, (Fla. Ct. App. 2020).

BOBBY J. NAPIER v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (BOBBY J. NAPIER v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Duncan v. Moore
754 So. 2d 708 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)
Fleming v. State
697 So. 2d 1322 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)