Scullock v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Scullock v. State

825 So. 2d 475, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11565, 2002 WL 1841617

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 14, 2002

DocketNo. 4D01-2610

StatusPublished

This text of 825 So. 2d 475 (Scullock v. State) 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

Scullock v. State, 825 So. 2d 475, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11565, 2002 WL 1841617 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Willie Seullock, Appellant, challenges the trial court’s dismissal of his habeas corpus petition. Appellant argued below that section 944.275, Florida Statutes, which requires inmates to serve 85 percent of their sentences, is violative of the single subject requirement of the Florida Constitution. This argument was rejected in Comer v. Moore, 817 So.2d 784 (Fla. 2002). The trial court dismissed the petition without prejudice to Appellant reapplying for relief upon a showing that he exhausted administrative remedies. As we have addressed the merits of the petition and found Appellant’s arguments to be without merit, we affirm. However, we write to foreclose any attempt by Appellant to pursue administrative remedies on his merit-less claim.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and GROSS, JJ, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Willie Seullock, Appellant, challenges the trial court’s dismissal of his habeas corpus petition. Appellant argued below that section 944.275, Florida Statutes, which requires inmates to serve 85 percent of their sentences, is violative of the single subject requirement of the Florida Constitution. This argument was rejected in Comer v. Moore, 817 So.2d 784 (Fla. 2002). The trial court dismissed the petition without prejudice to Appellant reapplying for relief upon a showing that he exhausted administrative remedies. As we have addressed the merits of the petition and found Appellant’s arguments to be without merit, we affirm. However, we write to foreclose any attempt by Appellant to pursue administrative remedies on his merit-less claim.

POLEN, C.J., STONE and GROSS, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

825 So. 2d 475, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11565, 2002 WL 1841617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scullock-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack