Priester v. State
955 So. 2d 644, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6613, 2007 WL 1261484
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 2, 2007·No. No. 4D07-1083·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The order denying Appellant’s emergency motions for reclarification of sentence is affirmed, without prejudice to his right to exhaust all administrative remedies with the Department of Corrections. If the department fails to implement the earlier orders clarifying and amending his sentences, he may then seek mandamus relief against the Department of Corrections in the circuit court. See Davis v. State, 943 So.2d 975 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Smith v. State, 785 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Priester v. State, 955 So. 2d 644, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 6613, 2007 WL 1261484 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).
955 So. 2d 644 (Priester v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Smith v. McDonough
955 So. 2d 644 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)