Thomas v. State
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Spaziano v. Florida Parole Commission (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
- Cooper v. Florida Parole Commission (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
- Bill Holt Sales & Leasing, Inc. v. Cousins (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
We affirm the decision of the circuit court to treat the rule 3.800(a) motion as a petition for writ of mandamus. Appellant did not show that he received an illegal sentence and his challenges to the parole statutes are properly reviewed in a mandamus petition.
However, the circuit court erred in requiring appellant to comply with section 57.085, Florida Statutes. Collateral criminal proceedings are exempt from this statute and the general indigency statute, section 57.081, Florida Statutes, applies in this case. See § 57.085(10), Fla. Stat.; Cason v. Crosby, 892 So.2d 536, 537 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Nevertheless, Thomas is not entitled to relief as his claims have been fully litigated more than once and are without merit. See Cal. Dep’t of Corrections v. Morales, 514 U.S. 499, 115 S.Ct. 1597, 131 L.Ed.2d 588 (1995); Paschal v. Wainwright, 738 F.2d 1173 (11th Cir. 1984).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.