Lane v. FLORIDA PROBATION COM'N

894 So. 2d 1087, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2921, 2005 WL 525567
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 8, 2005
Docket1D04-2654
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 894 So. 2d 1087 (Lane v. FLORIDA PROBATION COM'N) 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
Lane v. FLORIDA PROBATION COM'N, 894 So. 2d 1087, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2921, 2005 WL 525567 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

894 So.2d 1087 (2005)

Rayfield LANE, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA PROBATION COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 1D04-2654.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 8, 2005.

Rayfield Lane, pro se, petitioner.

Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Susan Schwartz, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Because the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed below set forth a prima facie basis for relief, the circuit court erred in summarily denying the petition without issuing an order to show cause. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.630(d). Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the circuit court's order and remand this cause for further proceedings.

WEBSTER, PADOVANO and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Bluntson v. Florida Parole Commission
910 So. 2d 896 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
894 So. 2d 1087, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2921, 2005 WL 525567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-florida-probation-comn-fladistctapp-2005.