Boudreaux v. Dugger

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Boudreaux v. Dugger

579 So. 2d 918, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5031, 1991 WL 90975

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 3, 1991

DocketNo. 90-2833

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 579 So. 2d 918 (Boudreaux v. Dugger) 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

Boudreaux v. Dugger, 579 So. 2d 918, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5031, 1991 WL 90975 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

WIGGINTON, Judge.

Appellant appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his petition for writ of habe-as corpus. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

In his petition, appellant has alleged numerous constitutional violations by prison officials in both the manner in which he has been placed in special confinement and the living conditions to which he is subjected while in special confinement. He has made specific allegations which, if true, might establish that the Department of Corrections has failed to comply with due process requirements. Therefore, summary dismissal of his petition without even the holding of an evidentiary hearing was error. See Williams v. Dugger, 573 So.2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Eahming v. Bigham, 539 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); and Bagley v. Brierton, 362 So.2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

ERVIN, J., and CAWTHON, Senior Judge, concur.

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

WIGGINTON, Judge.

Appellant appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his petition for writ of habe-as corpus. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

In his petition, appellant has alleged numerous constitutional violations by prison officials in both the manner in which he has been placed in special confinement and the living conditions to which he is subjected while in special confinement. He has made specific allegations which, if true, might establish that the Department of Corrections has failed to comply with due process requirements. Therefore, summary dismissal of his petition without even the holding of an evidentiary hearing was error. See Williams v. Dugger, 573 So.2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Eahming v. Bigham, 539 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); and Bagley v. Brierton, 362 So.2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

ERVIN, J., and CAWTHON, Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

579 So. 2d 918, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 5031, 1991 WL 90975, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boudreaux-v-dugger-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack