Creamer v. Florida Parole Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Creamer v. Florida Parole Commission

60 So. 3d 474, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5482, 2011 WL 1415293

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 14, 2011

Docket1D10-3120

StatusPublished

This text of 60 So. 3d 474 (Creamer v. Florida Parole 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

Creamer v. Florida Parole Commission, 60 So. 3d 474, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5482, 2011 WL 1415293 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, an inmate of the state correctional system, seeks review of a final declaratory judgment holding that Florida Administrative Code Rule 23-21.0155, addressing extraordinary review by the Flor *475 ida Parole Commission of a prisoner’s eligibility for parole, is a valid exercise of delegated legislative authority, and an earlier interlocutory order denying appellant’s motion to waive the filing fee. We affirm the final declaratory judgment without further discussion. However, based on Florida Parole Commission v. Spagiano, 48 So.3d 714 (Fla.2010), we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion to waive the filing fee.

AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.

BENTON, C.J., WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, an inmate of the state correctional system, seeks review of a final declaratory judgment holding that Florida Administrative Code Rule 23-21.0155, addressing extraordinary review by the Flor *475 ida Parole Commission of a prisoner’s eligibility for parole, is a valid exercise of delegated legislative authority, and an earlier interlocutory order denying appellant’s motion to waive the filing fee. We affirm the final declaratory judgment without further discussion. However, based on Florida Parole Commission v. Spagiano, 48 So.3d 714 (Fla.2010), we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion to waive the filing fee.

AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.

BENTON, C.J., WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 So. 3d 474, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5482, 2011 WL 1415293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/creamer-v-florida-parole-commission-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack