Walker v. David

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Walker v. David

876 So. 2d 729, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 9954, 2004 WL 1506162

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 7, 2004

DocketNo. 4D04-1535

StatusPublished

This text of 876 So. 2d 729 (Walker v. David) 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

Walker v. David, 876 So. 2d 729, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 9954, 2004 WL 1506162 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Donald Walker seeks certiorari review of a Palm Beach County Circuit Court order denying his petition for writ of mandamus, in which he challenged decisions of the Florida Parole Commission that suspended his presumptive parole release date. The circuit court denied mandamus relief, not on the merits of Walker’s challenges, but rather because Walker did not take a direct appeal of the Florida Parole Commission decisions. In so ruling, the circuit court has failed to apply the correct law. Jurisdiction of the district courts of appeal to entertain direct appeals by parolees and prisoners from final orders of the Florida Parole Commission was eliminated in 1983, and the proper remedy is by petition for an extraordinary writ filed in the circuit court. See Ch. 83-78, § 1, at 258, Laws of Fla.; see also Johnson v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 841 So.2d 615, 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). We note that while there is no thirty-day time limit for challenging orders by the Parole Commission in extraordinary writ petitions, the question of timeliness may be raised by the affirmative defense of laches. See Johnson, 841 So.2d at 617.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari, quash the order of the circuit court, and remand for further proceedings.

PETITION GRANTED.

WARNER, STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Donald Walker seeks certiorari review of a Palm Beach County Circuit Court order denying his petition for writ of mandamus, in which he challenged decisions of the Florida Parole Commission that suspended his presumptive parole release date. The circuit court denied mandamus relief, not on the merits of Walker’s challenges, but rather because Walker did not take a direct appeal of the Florida Parole Commission decisions. In so ruling, the circuit court has failed to apply the correct law. Jurisdiction of the district courts of appeal to entertain direct appeals by parolees and prisoners from final orders of the Florida Parole Commission was eliminated in 1983, and the proper remedy is by petition for an extraordinary writ filed in the circuit court. See Ch. 83-78, § 1, at 258, Laws of Fla.; see also Johnson v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 841 So.2d 615, 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). We note that while there is no thirty-day time limit for challenging orders by the Parole Commission in extraordinary writ petitions, the question of timeliness may be raised by the affirmative defense of laches. See Johnson, 841 So.2d at 617.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari, quash the order of the circuit court, and remand for further proceedings.

PETITION GRANTED.

WARNER, STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

876 So. 2d 729, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 9954, 2004 WL 1506162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-david-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack