07-4983 FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION v. RANDOLPH BROWN07-5774 PEGGY GILMORE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Florida First District Court » 2008 » 07-4983 FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION v. RANDOLPH BROWN07-5774 PEGGY GILMORE v. STATE OF FLORIDA

State: Florida

Court: Florida First District Court

Docket No: 07-4983

Case Date: 08/27/2008

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. RANDOLPH BROWN, Respondent. ______________________________/ Opinion filed August 27, 2008. Petition for Writ of Certiorari -- Original Jurisdiction. Kim M. Fluharty, General Counsel, and Anthony Andrews and Chris Papy, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Parole Commission, Tallahassee, for Petitioner. Michael Ufferman of Michael Ufferman Law Firm, P.A., Tallahassee, for Respondent. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED. CASE NO. 1D07-4983

PER CURIAM. We grant the Florida Parole Commission's petition for writ of certiorari and quash the circuit court's order remanding to the Commission to reconsider its parole decision. A decision by the Parole Commission to suspend an inmate's presumptive parole release date and defer setting an effective parole release date can be set aside

by a court only for demonstrated abuse in the exercise of the Commission's discretion. See Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1985); see also Fla. Parole Comm'n v. Huckelbury, 903 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). An abuse of discretion may be established in various ways, including a showing that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, such as the obligation to review the inmate's complete record and to articulate the basis for its decision. Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 625 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). An abuse of discretion also occurs if the denial of parole is based upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. Id. at 937; see also Moore v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 289 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1974). Here, respondent did not show that the Commission deviated from the legal requirements imposed upon it, and the record likewise fails to establish that the Commission based its decision upon illegal grounds or improper considerations. We therefore conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law when it directed the Parole Commission to reconsider its decision. Accordingly, the circuit court's order is QUASHED, and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent herewith. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

2

Download 07-4983 FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION v. RANDOLPH BROWN07-5774 PEGGY GILMORE v. STAT