Boltri v. Singletary
728 So. 2d 772, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1412, 1999 WL 69679
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 15, 1999·No. No. 98-3492·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Because petitioner has not demonstrated that the circuit court failed to afford him due process of law or departed from the essential requirements of law, we deny the petition. See Sheley v. State, 703 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), approved, 720 So.2d 216 (Fla.1998).
The proper remedy to correct a sentencing error is with the sentencing court, not a petition for writ of mandamus against the Florida Parole Commission and Department of Corrections. See Boyd v. State, 538 So.2d 517 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Boltri v. Singletary, 728 So. 2d 772, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1412, 1999 WL 69679 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).
728 So. 2d 772 (Boltri v. Singletary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Farhangi v. Dunkin Donuts
728 So. 2d 772 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)