Mehl v. Tucker

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mehl v. Tucker

71 So. 3d 248, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 16068, 2011 WL 4818503

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 12, 2011

Docket2D11-729

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 71 So. 3d 248 (Mehl v. Tucker) 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

Mehl v. Tucker, 71 So. 3d 248, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 16068, 2011 WL 4818503 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ALTENBERND, Judge.

Philip Mehl seeks review by certiorari of a circuit court order denying his petition *249 for writ of habeas corpus. Mr. Mehl claims that the Department of Corrections has not properly calculated the jail credit that the sentencing court in Martin County awarded him. He filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit where he was then confined without exhausting all of his administrative remedies with the Department. The circuit court dismissed the petition as premature, which is consistent with Pope v. State, 898 So.2d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (upholding trial court’s dismissal of habeas petition where inmate failed to allege exhaustion of administrative remedies).

During the pendency of this certiorari proceeding, the supreme court disapproved Pope, ruling that a court may not sua sponte dismiss a petition for writ of habeas corpus on the ground that the inmate failed to allege administrative exhaustion. Henry v. Santana, 62 So.3d 1122, 1129 (Fla.2011), aff'g Santana v. Henry, 12 So.3d 843 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). During the pendency of this proceeding, Mr. Mehl was also transferred to another correctional facility outside both the circuit in which he filed his petition and the jurisdiction of this court.

Under these circumstances, we deny his petition for writ of certiorari. This denial does not prevent Mr. Mehl from filing another petition in the circuit where he is currently confined, which petition will be governed by the supreme court’s decision in Henry.

Petition denied.

KELLY and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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

ALTENBERND, Judge.

Philip Mehl seeks review by certiorari of a circuit court order denying his petition *249 for writ of habeas corpus. Mr. Mehl claims that the Department of Corrections has not properly calculated the jail credit that the sentencing court in Martin County awarded him. He filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit where he was then confined without exhausting all of his administrative remedies with the Department. The circuit court dismissed the petition as premature, which is consistent with Pope v. State, 898 So.2d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (upholding trial court’s dismissal of habeas petition where inmate failed to allege exhaustion of administrative remedies).

During the pendency of this certiorari proceeding, the supreme court disapproved Pope, ruling that a court may not sua sponte dismiss a petition for writ of habeas corpus on the ground that the inmate failed to allege administrative exhaustion. Henry v. Santana, 62 So.3d 1122, 1129 (Fla.2011), aff'g Santana v. Henry, 12 So.3d 843 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). During the pendency of this proceeding, Mr. Mehl was also transferred to another correctional facility outside both the circuit in which he filed his petition and the jurisdiction of this court.

Under these circumstances, we deny his petition for writ of certiorari. This denial does not prevent Mr. Mehl from filing another petition in the circuit where he is currently confined, which petition will be governed by the supreme court’s decision in Henry.

Petition denied.

KELLY and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 So. 3d 248, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 16068, 2011 WL 4818503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mehl-v-tucker-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack