Hartley v. Florida Department of Corrections

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hartley v. Florida Department of Corrections

939 So. 2d 136, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 15053, 2006 WL 2588941

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 11, 2006

DocketNo. 1D05-4118

StatusPublished

This text of 939 So. 2d 136 (Hartley v. Florida Department of Corrections) 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

Hartley v. Florida Department of Corrections, 939 So. 2d 136, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 15053, 2006 WL 2588941 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWNING, J.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits. The petitioner has not met his extraordinary burden to show that the circuit court — acting in its appellate capacity in reviewing the petitioner’s challenge of an unfavorable institutional ruling after an inmate disciplinary hearing — violated a clearly established principle of law resulting in a gross miscarriage of justice. See Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 703 So.2d 1202, 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), approved, 720 So.2d 216 (Fla.1998); Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93, 95-96 (Fla.1983); Doss v. Fla. Dep’t of Corrs., 730 So.2d 316 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

PETITION DENIED.

BARFIELD and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

BROWNING, J.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits. The petitioner has not met his extraordinary burden to show that the circuit court — acting in its appellate capacity in reviewing the petitioner’s challenge of an unfavorable institutional ruling after an inmate disciplinary hearing — violated a clearly established principle of law resulting in a gross miscarriage of justice. See Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 703 So.2d 1202, 1206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), approved, 720 So.2d 216 (Fla.1998); Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93, 95-96 (Fla.1983); Doss v. Fla. Dep’t of Corrs., 730 So.2d 316 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

PETITION DENIED.

BARFIELD and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

939 So. 2d 136, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 15053, 2006 WL 2588941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartley-v-florida-department-of-corrections-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack