Grant v. State
This text of 183 So. 2d 596 (Grant v. State) 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.
Opinion
Appellant, Ernest Eugene Grant, appeals from an order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he alleged that the Florida Division of Corrections had deprived him of his rights under Section 944.-27, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.,1 the Florida Constitution, and the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. The object of his petition was to question a rule passed by the Florida Division of Corrections depriving 'any person placed in maximum security of statutory gain time while so incarcerated.
The State has filed in this cause an instrument which reflects that appellant is confined by reason of a sentence commencing around April 10, 1964 for a term of five years. By simple arithmetic computation it is obvious that if this Court agreed with petitioner’s contentions as to entitlement of gain time, there still remains a considerable length of time for him to serve prior to his being eligible for discharge from the sentence.. It is axiomatic that the writ of habeas corpus is designed for the purpose of effecting a speedy release of persons who are illegally deprived of their liberty or illegally detained from those who are entitled to their custody. See 15 Fla. Jur., Habeas Corpus, Section 2. The un-controverted record in this cause reflects that this prisoner is being lawfully detained, so the trial judge’s order denying petition for writ of habeas corpus is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
183 So. 2d 596, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grant-v-state-fladistctapp-1966.