Jones v. Johnson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jones v. Johnson

738 So. 2d 530, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 11523, 1999 WL 641441

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 25, 1999

DocketNos. 99-1139, 99-1363

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 738 So. 2d 530 (Jones v. Johnson) 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

Jones v. Johnson, 738 So. 2d 530, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 11523, 1999 WL 641441 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated proceedings, Lawrence Lee Jones petitions for certiorari review of an order denying his petition for writ of mandamus, and appeals a provision of the same order finding, pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes (1997), that the petition was frivolous and thus subjects Jones to disciplinary action by the Department of Corrections.

We conclude that the circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of law when it denied the petition for writ of mandamus, and therefore deny the petition for writ of certiorari. However, although the circuit court correctly found that Jones’ claim lacked merit, we cannot agree with its conclusion that the claim was so facially devoid of merit as to be frivolous. See generally Hay v. Moore, 728 So.2d 806 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). We therefore reverse the portion of the circuit court’s order finding that the petition below was frivolous.

WEBSTER, DAVIS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated proceedings, Lawrence Lee Jones petitions for certiorari review of an order denying his petition for writ of mandamus, and appeals a provision of the same order finding, pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes (1997), that the petition was frivolous and thus subjects Jones to disciplinary action by the Department of Corrections.

We conclude that the circuit court did not depart from the essential requirements of law when it denied the petition for writ of mandamus, and therefore deny the petition for writ of certiorari. However, although the circuit court correctly found that Jones’ claim lacked merit, we cannot agree with its conclusion that the claim was so facially devoid of merit as to be frivolous. See generally Hay v. Moore, 728 So.2d 806 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). We therefore reverse the portion of the circuit court’s order finding that the petition below was frivolous.

WEBSTER, DAVIS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

738 So. 2d 530, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 11523, 1999 WL 641441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-johnson-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack