Florida Parole & Probation Commission v. Brown

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Florida Parole & Probation Commission v. Brown

499 So. 2d 36, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 128, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11019

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 18, 1986

DocketNo. BM-201

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 499 So. 2d 36 (Florida Parole & Probation Commission v. Brown) 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

Florida Parole & Probation Commission v. Brown, 499 So. 2d 36, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 128, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11019 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the Parole Commission from an order entered on appellee’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The appealed order finds that appellee’s due process rights were violated when his parole was revoked and permits the Commission to complete the revocation proceeding provided appellee is represented by an attorney throughout the proceedings.

The appealed order was entered on January 21,1986, and the commission moved for rehearing ten days later. The motion was denied on March 6, 1986, and the notice of appeal was filed on April 4,1986. Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal on the basis of his contention that the appeal is brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(1)(F), and therefore, under Rule 9.140(c)(2), the notice was required to be filed within 15 days of rendition of the order. We disagree.

Rule 9.140(e)(1)(F) authorizes appeals by the state from orders “discharging a prisoner on habeas corpus”. Although the appealed order was entered on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, it did not discharge the prisoner. Therefore, Rule 9.140 does not apply. Generally, ha-beas corpus proceedings are civil in nature. State v. Buchanan, 191 So.2d 33 (Fla.1966). As such, the motion for rehearing tolled rendition of the final order and appellant had 30 days after disposition of the motion for rehearing to file its notice of appeal. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530; Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g); Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(b). Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied.

ERVIN, NIMMONS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the Parole Commission from an order entered on appellee’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The appealed order finds that appellee’s due process rights were violated when his parole was revoked and permits the Commission to complete the revocation proceeding provided appellee is represented by an attorney throughout the proceedings.

The appealed order was entered on January 21,1986, and the commission moved for rehearing ten days later. The motion was denied on March 6, 1986, and the notice of appeal was filed on April 4,1986. Appellee moves to dismiss this appeal on the basis of his contention that the appeal is brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(1)(F), and therefore, under Rule 9.140(c)(2), the notice was required to be filed within 15 days of rendition of the order. We disagree.

Rule 9.140(e)(1)(F) authorizes appeals by the state from orders “discharging a prisoner on habeas corpus”. Although the appealed order was entered on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, it did not discharge the prisoner. Therefore, Rule 9.140 does not apply. Generally, ha-beas corpus proceedings are civil in nature. State v. Buchanan, 191 So.2d 33 (Fla.1966). As such, the motion for rehearing tolled rendition of the final order and appellant had 30 days after disposition of the motion for rehearing to file its notice of appeal. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530; Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g); Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(b). Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is denied.

ERVIN, NIMMONS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

499 So. 2d 36, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 128, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-parole-probation-commission-v-brown-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack