Siers v. Florida State Senate

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Siers v. Florida State Senate

644 So. 2d 116, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9661, 1994 WL 549506

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 11, 1994

DocketNo. 93-3985

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 644 So. 2d 116 (Siers v. Florida State Senate) 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

Siers v. Florida State Senate, 644 So. 2d 116, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9661, 1994 WL 549506 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charles Siers appeals an order which dismissed his petition for writ of mandamus. We affirm.

The petition for writ of mandamus filed in the trial court claimed that the Florida Senate’s action in passing Senate Bill No., 26B (1993) (now section 944.278, Florida Statutes (1993)) was a violation of the ex post facto provision of the United States Constitution because it had the effect of causing the Department of Corrections to rescind provisional or administrative gain time which had previously been awarded. The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim.

Siers filed a notice of appeal. He again argues that rescinding previously awarded provisional gain time is a violation of the ex post facto provisions of the United States Constitution. The Florida Supreme Court has rejected this exact argument in Langley v. Singletary, 645 So.2d 961 (Fla.1994); see Griffin v. Singletary, 638 So.2d 500 (Fla.1994). We also reject appellant’s argument for the reasons expressed in Langley and Griffin.

ZEHMER, C.J., and KAHN, J., concur. BENTON, J., concurs in result only.

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