FLORIDA PRISON LEGAL

ers ectives
ISSN# 1091-8094

VOLUME 13 ISSUE 1

Florida Ex-:Offender Task
Force Says Change is
Needed
uietly, almost under the radar, for the past two years a
Qtask
force put together by former Gov. Jeb Bush has
been examining why so many people who are released
from prison return. The task force, called the Governor's
Ex-Offender Task Force, was also charged by Gov. Bush
with coming up with ideas and suggestions ~hat might
interrupt that pattern and at least reduce recidivism in
Florida. Recently that task force, made up of corrections
and parole officials, attorneys, educators, community
leaders, prison ministers and a couple of ex-offenders,
submitted its final report and recommendations. Whether
the task force's work has any impact only time will tell,
but it is clear from its report that something needs to be
done to disrupt the revolving prison doors.
Every year 31,000 people are released from
Florida prisons back into society. Within 36 months of
their release approximately one third, 25.7%, of them will
be back in prison. The cost to keep each of them
incarcerated is $18,000 a year with the overall estimated
cost to taxpayers being nearly $148 million a year-not
counting capital costs, court costs or costs to local
governments. And, just for perspective, if each of those
prison returnees receives the average 4.6 y~ar sentence,
Florida taxpayers. will have to, no-are being required to,

JAN/FEB 2007

shell out over $670 million for a single year's worth of
recidivists over that sentence period.
Florida Department of Corrections Secretary Jim
McDonough says that the reason so many reoffend is
simple, "they're not prepared to live a life without crime."
Finding ways to help offenders change that
patteJil was the task force's job.. Their findings and
recommendations essentially mirrored the common sense .
observation of Secretary McDonough: Florida netds to do
more to help ex-offenders succeed in living a crime-free
life after prison. Otherwise, the cost imposed on society
will remain unacceptably high, both financially and in
terms of new crimes being committed and victims being
created.
"The point of getting drug-addicted offenders
clean, mentally ill prisoners on medication and
undereducated felons into employment training is not
simply to make life easier for: prisoners,"' said Robert
Blount, vice-chairman of the Ex-offender Task Force.
"This is a public safety issue, and all of us will be better
off if we can keep more ex-offenders on the straight and
narrow path to legal, gainful employment."
.
The task force's recommendations call for broad
. changes in the way that Florida deals with prisoners and
newly released ex-offenders and a break from the fixation
with mass warehouse' incarceration and punishment
masquerading as social and economic policy that the
recidivism rate shows is not working to make
communities safer.
Those
recommendations
include:

FAlULIES ADVOCATES PRISONERS

ON

I

THE
INSIDE

Building a Prison Empire
:
A Crack in Some Evidence Standard
~
Notable Cases
2007 Resource List
FDOC Facts and Statistics

4
6
14
20
26

Florida Prison Legal Perspect~ves
•

Improving and expanding job training and
education for prisoners.

•

Begin prerelease planning from the day that a
prisoner is sent to prison and develop
individualized community reentry plans.

•

Create an prisoner-discharge handbook containing
individualized reentry plans and programs and
services available in - the ex-offender's home
community.

•

Help prisoners sign up for Social Security cards,
driver licenses and state identification cards
before they are released.

•

Assist disabled prisoners apply for disability
and/or Medicaid benefits before they are released. .

•

Limit the requi.rement that ex-offenders have their
civil rights restored as a condition for employment
or licensing.

•

Expand faith-based programs within the prisons
by converting at least six conventional prisons
into faith-based prisons within two years.

FLORIDA PRISON LEGAL PERSPr::CTIVES
P.O. BOX 1511

CHRISTMAS, FLORIDA 32709

Publishing Division or:

FLORIDA PRISONERS' LEGAL AID ORGANIZATION~ INC.
i\

501

(c)

OJ Nun-pwlil Organil.ali"n

FPLAO DIRECTORS
Teresa Burns-Posey
Bob Posey, eLA
David W. Bauer, Esq.
Loren D. Rhoton, Esq.

FPLP STAFF
Publ isher
Editor
Research

Ten:sa l3urlls,Hos.ey
Bob Posey
Sherri Johnson
Anthony Stuart

Florida I'risoncrs' l.cgal Aid Organil.alion. Inc.. 1'.0: rJoxl5)1\.
Christmas. 1'1. 32709. puhlishcs FLORIDA PRISON,tEGtd"
PERSPECTIVES (FI'I..I') up to six timcs a ycar. 1-'1'1.1' iS,a nOIl~prolil'
publicatioll ti)cllsing on thc Florida prison and crimin;il! juslice
systcms, 1"1'1.1' provides a vchide tilr ncws. intiJrlnalilll1,'and
rcsources affecting prisonCfs. their tiunilies. Ii'iends. Ill\'clliljl~s:andl:
the gcneral puhlic of Floritla, Rl.'lluction of crime and r~cidivlslil.
maintenance of liunily lies. civil rights. improving co.iHlitjons oj~ ~
conliucmenl. promoting skilled court acccss tilr prisoncrs. and"
promoling accollulability or prison officials arc all: issues 1'1/1'.1/ is: '
designed 10 address, FI'I.I'·s ullll-altomey volunleer slaff; CaI.11101
respllmllo requesls fllr kgal lIth'icc, Ilue to thc volul11e Ilfin}iil;lhat is
w.:civcd and \'o!lmteer staff limitations. all corresl1tllidcii~}tlJ.it:is'
recei\'ed cannol be respllnded to. but all mail will'rel.'l:ih:ihdi,;idqal'
attenlion. Permission is grauted to reprinl milterial. appearing,iil "I'Ll'
lhat docs not indicalc it is copyrighted provided that ri'l'j' amI' any
indicated author arl.' idelllilied ill Ihe reprint and a cop)' Ilftlie
Jl"hlieatioll in which the material is puhlished is provided to,lhe
1'1'1.1' puhlisher. rhis publication is lIot meant til hl' a subSliluti.: lilr
Ie!!al or Illha proli:ssillnal advice. The material in FI'I';I~' sho.uid'nol
he relicd UpOIl as aUlllOrilative and may Nllt contiljn suflii.:ii.:nl
inli'f1natilln to deal wilh a legal prllhlem. 1-'1'1.1' isaulllni:Jlic.illysent: '
til all memhers of I'I'I.AO. Illc. as a mClllhi:rshil);h~nclit;
ivlemhership dues lilr 1'1'1.;\0. Inc.. operate yl'arly and! areSHl'tilf'
prisoll.:rs. $15 lilr lillnily memhers alllilltha private individpals; S30
li,r atillmeys. and SI,O fllr agencil's. lihraries. andinslillllitlllS.

That last recommendation has raised some
eyebrows. The task force could not point to any proof that
faith-based. programs work any better at. reducing
recidivism than other programs.
Florida created the nations first faith-based prison
three years ago and now has three faith-based facilitiestwo for men and one for wom.en-and seven other prisons
with faith-based dormitories. The programs serve over
3,500 prisoners, or about 4% of the prison systems
90,000+ prison population.
Proponents of faith-based programs claim that the
prisoners in them have fewer disciplinary problems and a
lower recidivism rate than the general prison population.
However, . researchers say that a variety of
mitigating factors may have more to do with lower
disciplinary problems than the religious instruction itself
as those who volunteer to attend such programs are
usually those. less lik~ly to be disciplinary problems and
they receive services not provided in conventional prisons
as motivation. Simply put, there is no scientific evidence
showing that ex-offenders who leave faith-based prisons
are less likely to end up back in prison.
Faith-based programs are fine, said, FDOC
Secretary McDonough, but the most important component
to. reducing recidivism is education, followed by job
training, mental health and drug abuse treatment and Iifemanagement skills. More than 4,000 prisoners read at a
first-or second-grade level, said McDonough.

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives'
In fact, according to the task force, of 7.6 million
"They have to have a job. You can eat if you
jobs in Florida" 2.9 million-39.2o/o-are positions that
have ,a job, but you can't eat faith. It gives you the moral
stability, but the facts of life are you need to survive," , state laws prohibit former felons from holding or for
which they must receive a special dispensation to hold,
McDonough pragmatically said.
M,cDonough has
which is very rarely granted. This is a major, sometimes
previously suggested that education, vo~tional,' mental
insurmountable, roadblock for ex-offenders reentering
health and substance abuse programs, ,all of which wer~
society only to find they can't get ajob that pays enough
drastically reduced In Florida prisons in recent years, need
to be expanded. FloridaTax Watch, a taxpayer watchdog
to make a decent, sustainable living.
,
Except for a few missteps, the taskforce's
group, has previously found that for every dollar spent on
such programs, $1.66 is returned in the fir~ year and
recommendations are viable. While most of the weight
and responsibility would fall on the Department of
$3.20 in the second.
,
Althqugh recommending' limits on civil rights
Corrections, Secretary McDonough has said it wouldn't
cost much more than' an additional $6-miJIion to increase
restoration being tied to specific job employment or
reading'levels and provide substance abuse treatment to
licensing, the task force avoided directly' addressing
Florida prisoners, and he claims that the state would see as
automatic
restoration
of
civil
rights
for
ex-offenders
in
its
"
,
report, ,perhaps because Gov. Bush was opposed to , much as a six-fold return in money saved and crimes
averted.
.
automatic restoration.
The ball is now in the Legislature's court.
Gov. Charlie Crist, on the other hand, who will.be
instrumental (along with the Legislature) in implementing
Lawmakers will have to be the ones to fund any changes
any changes to the prison system and ex-offender reentry
and move to amend the laws to establish automatic
efforts, has said that he believes ex-felons should regain
restoration of civil rightS.
The challenge, however, will be, fore lawmakers
their civil rights when they finish their. sentence. Two
to change ~eir punishment-and-damn-the-cost mentalitY.
other Cabinet members" Agriculture Secretary Charles
Lawmakers need.to wake up to the reality that continuing
Bronson and newly elected Chief EconOmic Officer Alex
to cut ex~offendersoff from being able to change their
Sink, have stated they could support automatic restoration
lives and have a reasonable opportunity to be productive
if it contained exemptions for certain crimes such' as
'citizens only leads to more crime and victim suffering.
homicide, sex offenses and selling drugs to minors. Crist
The right man is in charge of the DOC to effect the needed
said he thought those exemptions were reasonaple at a
December '06 clemency board meeting that he attended. '
changes, and there will never be a better time for them
than right now.
Florida is only one of three. states that still
withholds the civil rights of all felons even after they have
completed their sentence. The other two states are
[Note: As an aside, approximately two weeks before the
Virginia and Kentucky. As noted by the task, force,
Ex-Offender Task Force's final meeting in Nov. '06 to
Florida by far leads the nation .in the number of people
vote on what recommendations should 'go into its final
who are disenfranchised, the list now includes more than
report, Florida Prisoners'· Legal Aid Organization's
700,000 Floridians,. more than twice the number of any
Chairwoman Teresa Bums Posey learned that the
suggestion had been made by Florida Parole Commission
other state, and a number continuing to grow yearby year.
Under current laW in Florida, until the Clemency
Chairwoman Monica David, a' member of the. task force,
Board, made up of . the Governor
and
Cabinet,
grants
exthat
the Parole Commission should be placed in total
.
•
I
felons their civil rights back, those people cannotvote. A
charge of all ex-offender reentry efforts in the state. MrS.
process that can take many, many years.
Bums Posey also learned that the task force was seriously
The more immediate concern' for ex-offenders
consideririg a recommendation to that effect. Mrs. Bums
being released from prison, however, is that until their
Posey contacted the task forces members before their final
rights are restored they are barred from a lQng list ofjobs,
meeting and provided them with numerous reasoQji, back
including being a nurse, dental hygienist, physical
up by evidence from a variety of authoritative sources, as
therapist, licensed pest exterminator, bartender,
to why the Parole Commission should not- be considered
paramedic, lottery vender; athletic trainer, auctioneer, and
qualified or competent to handle any reentry effort, much
dozens of more jobs that require a state license.
less a statewide effort. Acting on behalfof FPLAO and its
As Vicki Lopez Lukis, chairwoman of the Exmembers, Mrs. Bums Posey suggested just what the task
Offender Task Force, and a former Lee County
force ultimately did recommend, that the DOC was in the
commissioner who once served 16 months in federal
best position to implement and lead reentry efforts. Mrs.
prison for mail fraud, said, "if you;~ecommitted certain
Bums Posey later learned that her infonnation about the
crimes, you can never bea Fish and Game Warden, but
Parole Commission created much debate at the, task
you can still be a Highway Patrol Officer. What sense
force's final hearing, resulting in .Monica David's
does that make?"
'.,
suggestions being shot down. Mrs. Bums Posey wishes to 3

Flori~a

Prison Legal Perspectives

thank those task force members who kept her informed,
they know who they are. -editor.] •

-Commentary-,
Building a Prison Empire
by Kinlock C. Walpole
ur elected officials have unhinged criminal justice
and turned it into a massive, poverty program that
breeds criminality.
Prisons alone have consistently
consumed a steady eight to 10 percent of an upwardspiraling state budget for decades. The only visible return
is a relative political stability for those in power.
Florida is investing, $21~5 billion in prisons this
, year, and the prisons' only job is to provide a secure
environment with room and board for about 90,000 men,
women and children. The State,'s version of doing "hard
time" is so appealing that about 45 percent of inmates
have been returning to prison. In fact, there will be more
inmates with previous time in state prison this year than
were in prison 20 years ago.
You could say that Florida state prisons are
nothing more than a rest period where inmates often get
much required medical attention while honing skills and
broadening contacts in preparation for their next round of
criminality. By the way, medical attention accounted for
over 20 percent of the inmate cost per day for the, FY
2005-06.
It appears our elected officials get a better return
on their investment of our tax dollars than we taxpayers.
Doing "hard time" is nothing more than an excuse for a
rural poverty program in the form of a prison industrial
complex and an urban poverty program for the criminal
justice community. The big payback is the electoral gold
of campaign funds and votes.
There are two lynch pins that can reduce the size
.of our state prison population in half. The first is to
address the war on drugs as a medical problem, much as
we do with alcohol. And the sel;ond is by, measuring
drops in the recidivism rates.
Every argument used to justify the war on drugs
was used to justify prohibition. We are suffering identical
consequences in the war of drugs as we did prior to the
repeal of prohibition.
The saddest consequence is that we are, and have
been, s~nding more men, women and children to prison
for drug law violations than we have for violent crimes
over th~ last five years. Violent crimes include murder,
forcible rape, robbery. and aggravated assault.
The National closur~ rate for violent crimes in the
same period was less than SO percent. That means no one
is captured. convicted and incarcerated for over half of the
violent crimes committed.
It seems we could better protect Floridians by
focusing more on violent crime.
However, civil
4 forfeitures associated with violent crimes pale in

O

comparison to drug crimes, which probably a~counts for
the emphasis on drug crimes by the criminal justice
community.
Our politicians argue that crime statistics have
decreased over the last 14 years. What they are not telling
you is that Florida has consistently been above the
national averages in violent crimes since 1960.
Studies show that the simple earning of aGED
functionally reduces recidivism. Can elected' officials
justify why they cut the Department of Corrections'
capability to provide education to inmates by 50 percent?
The criminal justice codes can be modified so that
every time a person is convicted of a felony, they must
graduate at the next higher' level of schooling. Coupled
with this is the requirement to obtain a vocational degree'
with its corresponding license or certification.
This would not be in lieu of,a sentence,. but in
conjunction with it. It would mean that both sentence and
educational performance criteria must be met prior to
release.
The DOC does not have the skill to implement
such a broad educational mandate. Our state secondary
school systems have already failed these people once, and
there is no reason to believe they have the desire or ability
to redress those failures.
That leaves the community college system.. This
is a system that has decades of experience in remedial
education for thousands of students from a dysfunctional
state school system. They also have the skills and
experience of teaching vocational programs.
The question of who should pay is simple enough.
The state failed in its responsibilities for a secondary
education, and so it pays. The vocational programs can be
paid by the inmate in the form of a student loan.
There are definite pluses to such a program. ,
Research by both Florida Tax Watch and the DOC shows
that inmates participating in educational and vocational
programs ,have higher performance levels, lower
disciplinary rates, lower recidivism rates, and are more
likely to stay off of public dole. Further, these studies also
show there is up to a $3.20,retum on each dollar invested
within two years.
'The single biggest minus is that politicians lose
the political gold from the crimiilaljustice community and
the prison industrial complex. In the end, this is why such
a concept wi II never become a reality.
Kinlock C. Walpole is Director of the Gateless
Zen Center, a Gainesville-based group that works with
prison inmates. This commentary originally appeared in
the Gainesville Sun on Sept. 24. 2006. •

-~:':::(~
~

~

~--;-"-

--~-~~_.

~

-~1.~
...•.

.,

-

-

-

.a

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives

FDOC Secretary McDonough
Nominated to Continue

O

n Wednesday, January 10 newly-elected Governor
Charlie Crist named Florida Department of
Corrections (FDOC) Secretary Jim McDonough to remain
in charge of the state's prison system. Crist praised
McDonough for doing a good job cleaning up and
reforming the department, which has been repeatedly
rocked over the past two years by scandal. In fact,
McDonough was picked last year to take over and clean
up the prison system by former Gov; Jeb Bush after
disgraced secretary James Crosby was forced to retire
while under investigation for corruption.
McDonough, a former army commander who
served in Vietnam and Bosnia, and who before taking over
at the FDOC acted as the state's drug czar, wasn't
guaranteed to remain at the FDOC's helm when Charlie
Crist became governor in January. He has taken some
heat from critics within the department and their union for
his no-nonsense management style and his intolerance of
corruption, incompetence and cronyism among
employees. Among his policies that have disturbed some
employees was his implementation of random drug testing
and physical fitness requirements. That latter has caused
the most upset among out-of-shape employees.
Those same policies, however, have garnered
praise for Secretary McDonough from state lawmakers
and Gov. Crist.
"He came into the agency under very difficult
circumstances and did a remarkable job re-instilling
integrity, honor and discipline to an agency in bad need of
it," Crist recently said.
The Florida Police Benevolent Association, the
union that represents about 17,000 prison employees and
almost 3,000 probation officers, is protesting
McDonough's physical-fitness requirements.
David
Murrell, executive director of the PBA, sajd that the union
is not against physical-fitness requirements for prison
guards but that the department (i.e., McDonough) ignored
collective bargaining requirements by not negotiating with
the PBA over work rules.
"I think he's doing a good job of cleaning up the
department, but we have some problems with .his
management style. We wish it would be more inclusive
than it's been," Murrell said.
.
McDonough also earned praise from prisoners and
their families in mid-January when he followed through
on his promise to do something about the excessively high
prices being charged prisoners for commissary items by
Keefe Commissary Network, a private contractor whom
fonner Secretary Crosby brought in to operate the prisoner
and visitor canteens in 2003. In mid-January prices for
items sold in the canteens dropped about 20% for most of
the items.

McDonough had threatened to rebid the canteen
contract last year, and went so far as to put out invitations
to bid on a new contract. Apparently, Keefe was allowed
to keep the contract by reducing its prices to a more
reasonable level comparable to prices outside the prisons.
McDonough had the distinction of being the first
department head holdover that Crist chose to continue
from Gov. Bush's administration. Upon being named by
Crist, McDonough said he will press on with reforming
the prison system.
"I commit myself to fulfilling our missions, the
foremost of which is public safety," McDonough said. •

Ex-Wife of Ex-FDOC
Secretary Named in Lawsuit

I

n December '06 the Florida Department of Management
Services filed suit against Leslie Crosby, the ex-wife of
former Florida Dep~ment of Corrections (FDOC)
Secretary James Crosby. The lawsuit alleges that the pair
intentipnally tried to defraud th~ state after James Crosby
was ousted as head of the prison system last year for
. corruption.
.
The lawsuit, that was filed in the circuit court in
Tall!lhassee, alleges that once James Crosby believed that
he was going to be indicted on federal corruption charges
that he and his wife conspired to shield his state retirement
benefits from forfeiture by divorcing and with Leslie
·Crosby then using those benefits to buy a new home.
Leslie Crosby's attorney Terrence Brown claims
that she never spent or received any of her ex-husbands
retirement money. She instead bought a Starke house with
money the couple received from selling their home in
Tallahassee, Brown said.
Records show that the Crosby's sold the.
Tallahassee house in May, about three months after James
Crosby was forced to retire under investigation that he had
been involved in criminal activities, including taking
kickbacks from a contractor given a contract by Crosby to
operate commissaries in prison family visiting areas. The
Tallahassee home was sold for $209,000 in May and
Leslie Crosby bought the. Starke house in June, just one
day after James Crosby signed a deal to plead guilty to
federal charges that he had received illegal kickbacks
while secretary of the third largest state prison system in
the U.S.
When Crosby was first indicted he was given
notice' that the state intended to stop his retirement
benefits and seek recovery of almost a ql;Jarter million
dollars that he received when he left the FDOC.
The lawsuit filed by the DMS seeks more than
$191,000 from the Crosby's'. Leslie Crosby's attorney
claims the lawsuit is "shameful" and filed a motion to
have it dismissed. •

5

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
A Crack in The "Some Evidence"
.standard Armor'Put A Pry Bar To It
Comrades
by John Cox
While going thru the November 2006 issue of Prison Legal
News (Page 40), I came across an article that describes how an
~ate in the Minnesota DOC successfully petitioned to the
Mmnesota Supreme Court for a violation of due process.
(Carillo v. Fabian, 701 N.W. 2d 763 (Minn 2005»
The Scenario is familiar to FDOC inmates; an officer writes
a DR, you present witnes$es and/or evidence that completely
precludes or exonerates you. Presto! Guilty "Based on the
Officer's Statement". DC time, loss ofgain time.
In this case, he had a witness who said he didn't do it, and his
alleged victim said he didn't do it Bam!' Guilty, based on the
Officers statement. DC time, loss ofgain time.
Carillo's petition argued that his term of imprisonment was
extended without providing Sufficient Procedural Due Process.
The court concluded it was inappropriate to analyze Carillo's
liberty interest by looking solely to Statutory Language; rather it
must examine the nature of the deprivation and that extent to
.which the deprivation departs from the basic conditions of
. Carillo's sentence. (he lost,only 7 days.)
Part of the decision is based on the makeup of Minnesota
.Law. But other, pertinent parts could, and SHOULD be used as
the basis for an argument to the F1oridaCourts.·The Minnesota
Supreme Court held that the '''Some Evidence" standard of
Superintendent, Massachqsetts Correctional .Institution at
Walpole v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445 (1985) addressed only a standlU'd
of appellate review, not a standard of proof. (I) Whether a
standard ofproofsatisfies due process requires a 3 part test:

I. The private interests affected;
2. The risk oferroneous deprivation of such interest; and
3. The Government's interest. .
Carillo satisfied the first test. The court said that "The risk 'of
an ,erroneous deprivation of an interest is high when the factfinder uses the "Some Evidence" Standard." As to the final test,
the government has an interest in promoting fair procedures.
The court further stated:
"The "Some Evidence" standard sends the message to
prisoners as well as society at large that once an individual is
convicted ofa crime, he is presumed guilty ofevery subsequent
allegation. ..
,

The MiMesota Supreme Court's decision was that Hearing
Officers must find by a preponderance of evidence that [Carillo]
had committed a disciplinary offense before the MDOC can
extend his release date.
Several others more worthy than I have' stated on' many
occasions that you should "Adopt the language' of the
Law/Courts" when writing requests, filing grievances or
petitions, motions and complaints. This is an excellent case to
adopt language from, and to cite, even though it',s in Minnesota.
The "Some Evidence" standard that the FDOC uses is
outlined in Superintendent v. Hill, and is based on that adopted
by the Federal Jurisprudence, which is probably the lowest
6 possible standard. Until now, what most courts failed to

recognize or address is that the "Some Evidence" standard is
one of Judicial review NOT THE BURDEN OF PROOF AT.
THE HEARING ITSELF. Florida Courts have failed. to; even .
mention this distinction. See Newell v. Moore, 767 So. 2d 1240
(Fla. 151 DCA 2000)
,
In Redman v. FDOC, 7 F.A.L.R. 2641 (DOAH, 84-1916R.
19~5) it was held that "Evidence" in a DR hearing means
eVIdence as defined by the Florida Evidence Code, § 90, FL.
Statutes.
.
The evidence code doesn't define evidence, b~t it does defme
REbEVANT EVIDENCE: "Evidence tending to prove or
disprove a material fact" § 90.401.
..
The burden of proof and a, standard of review are totally
different. The former is a burden that's carried by the fact finder
(DR Hearing) while the latter is a standard the court applies
when reviewing a DR Hearing and record. Hill at 457.'
.
In Plymel v. Moore, 770 So. 2d 242 (Fla. lit DCA 2000), the
court held that, "The standard of review applicable tocircliit
court review ofa decision ofan administrative agency is:
I. Whether procedural due process was accorded;
2. Whether the essential requirements of law were observed'
and '
,
,
3. Whether the administrative findings and judgment are
supported by competent substantial.evidence."
Because prisoners in Florida are required to use Mandamus
to review, administrative decisions. The "Competent Substantial
Evidence" ~tandard of review has supplanted' the "Some
Evidence" standard of Hill. In order to avoid creating bad '
precedent for all prisoners in Florida, be prepared to argue
burden of proof issues.' , RELEVANT EVIDENCE OF
MATERIAL FACT, i.e. witnesses.
Common sense dictates that the preponderance of evidence
standard is required because due process itself mandates that an
inmate be permitted to marshal th~ facts, call witnesses, and
present evidence. All of this would be negated by a "Some .
Evidence" standard that allows a finding of guilt on any
eV~dence ~t all regardless of the presence of exculpatory
eVIdence In any amount. In fact, under the some evidence
standard, Courts will not «Make an independent assessment' of
the credibility ofwitnesses", Hill at 455.
. If that standard is the same at the hearing itself it negat.es th~
right to' call witnesses at all. Likewise,' the some evidence
standard, as a standard of review, prohibits the "Weighing of
Evidence", Cummings v. Dunn, 630 F. 2d 649 at 650 (Sib CIR
1980) Hamilton v. Scott, 762F. supp 794 at 800 (N.D. ILL
1991).
.
.
Applying this as a hearing standard again negates the right to
present evidence at all beca,use it will not be weighed by the
team when the ,only issue is if any evidence exists to support a
finding ofguilt!
.
Both Article. I, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution and the
141h Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provide for due
process which "serves as the vehicle to ensure fair treatment
through the proper administration of justice where substantive
rights,are at issue." Dept of Law Enforcement v. Real Property,
5S8 So. 2d 957 at 962-964. In LaFaso v. Patrissi, 633A.O. 2d
695 the court said,
"...We find incredible the suggestion that a De Noud
proceeding intended to determine the guilt or innocence of any

Florida Prison Legal Penpeetives
individual could dispense with these procedures and retain, a
semblance offtmdamental fairness."
.

Corecia J. WOO, Attorney at Law is
publishing a collection ofletters to
and from inmates. We are looking
for letters to or from your loved incarcerated family member to review
and consider for the collection. A
release will be needed giving your
express written consent to publish
these letters. For more information
and to download the release, please
email: coreciawoo@yahoo.com .

LaFaso at 698,I;Ommenting on Hill and Goefv. Dailey, 991 F.
2d 1437 (811I Cir 1993)
.
Bringing a fairness/due process claim under the State
Constitution wiD have extremely favorable precedent behind it
Claims against-faulty DR hearings should attack the ~ right
to due process, attack the fundamental bias of being foul1d guilty
no matter what. and be vigilant to procedural errors that can get
you a new hearing, or even have it thrown out.

Forecast: More people in prison
Ascudypl1ljeas majorgrowtb inthe us.'
uIatfan.The Pew Charitable
1hIst says rncnetban t'1 millionadults ~in7uon by2011 - an Increase
ofnearly 200.000 trom 2006. Alook at the prison landscape:
us. priscn rpuladon
More than 3% oftheadult us. pop..

. (in mm1ons'

uIation Is under correctlons supervision. Where they are: (In mlIIillns)

iii'

1.6 - - - - - - - - - :

Prison

1.46

.

Parole .
0.4

.pfil$1

Jan

~1fu'<iUJ{'

~

,

03~

•

.035

,

'11

*-2lllI5l1prn,

__

PnIjedId Increue 01 prison populatkms In aU 50 stlll!S ..
~t
41X
NoM. . 21" Olda. '
lB .Ala.

_

MaIne

M

IG1iL

2)"

RI

i·X.X.X.X.X.X.X~~X.X.X.X.~~X.X.X.X.X.X.~~X·~~~1

~ . FLORIDA CLEMENCY SPECIALIST ~
. ~ FOR ASSISTANCE INFORMATION . ~
~
WRITE OR CALL:

I

~

~

~

NATIONAL CLEMENCY PROJECT . ~
~
8624 CAMP COLUMBUS ROAD
~
~ _ HIXSON, TENNESSEE 37343
~
~.X.~X.X.X.X.X.~~X.X.~~X.X.X.I.I.I.I.:t.X.I.~~X.'

'"

'"

Florida Department of Corrections
Percent of State General Revenue Budget
. Appropriated to Corrections'

Inmate Cost Per Day by Type of Facility
IOO~

$801-

·
n
$6281

$601$43.26
$40~---;

~

i'SU'11

5201-

i
1

II

$.'--_...:....L..:...---L~_-l..J.

Adult

Private

Male

Male

Insf.

Youthful
Offender

......._

n
I

,ill:2Q

I

8.0%

8.0 r-

$92.60

~

I

I

I

I

!

i.

7.9 l-

7.8

IT

I
I,

I

I

8.0%

l-

8.0%

,.--

,I
7.9%

I

I
I
I

.7.7

7.7%

~

I

I
"
........._
........"-'--_.......

Adu/t/YO Specially Reception
Female
Inst
Centers

7.6

I
FY O().() J FY 0 1.02 FY 02.03 FY 03-04 FY 04005 FY 05-06

7

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
. .
~'

POST CONVICTION
CORNER

by Loren

,;

lUIotoe."" \

Every person who is accused of a criminal offense must be competent to
face the charges against him before a trial can be held. The Due Process Clause Qf
the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits states from
proceeding with trial, or any other critical stage of the criminal proces~, when the
defendant is incompetent. Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. ,375, 378(1966); Florida,
Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.210Ca); and. Carrion v. State, 859 So.2d 563 (I~la.
5th DCA 2003). Florida courts have also held that failure to so abide results in
deprivation of a defendant's constitutionally guaranteed righ, to a fair trial.
Brockman .v. State, 852·So.2d 320, 332 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) citing Hill y. State, '
473 So.2d 1253, 1259 (Fla. 1985). Usually, when competency ofa defendant is in '
question, either defense counselor the trial court will initiate a competency
evaluation of the defendant. However, sometimes the courts will use inappropriate' .
or insufficient procedures to detennine a def~ndant's competency. Other times
counsel may disregard clear indications of a lack of competency. In such cases it '
is proper to vacate the judgment and sentence and remand the case to the trial
court for retrial after conducting a proper competency evaluation.
.
If an attorney is aware of facts which indicate that his client may be
incompetent to understand the proceedings against him, it is that attorney's duty
alert the court to such incompetence and initiate a competency evaluation. Some '
factors which should be warning signs for defense counsel would be prior
hospitalizations for mental health. problems or the client's use of prescribed ,
psychotropic medications. Likewise, warnings from the 4efendant~s family or
friends can alert an attorney to the fact that a client may not be competent to "
understand and assist with the proceedings. An attorney's failu.re to explore a .
client's ability to understand the nature of the proceedings againsflum, when the'
attorney has reason to believe that the client may not be competent, can amount ~o
ineffectiveness of counsel which is sufficientto warrant postconviction relie£ .
See, Williams v. State, 685 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1996) [summarY denial o~ '
postconviction relief was improper where defend;ant alleged that his use of
.
prescriptive medication interfered with his ability to understand the nature and
conseq~ences of his'plea agreement]; and, Broomfield v. State, 788 So.2d 1043 '
(Fla. 2nd DCA 200 I) [counsel ineffective for failing to investigate client's
competency where attorney had reason to believe client may be incompetent to
proceed].

'to

8

Flor~da

PrisoD Legal Penpectiyes .

Sometimes .a trial court is aware of possible competency concerns about ~
defendant andorders a competen~yeva1uation. In fact, the United States Supreme
Court has placed tbeburden on the trial court to, on its own motion, make an
inquiry into and nold ahearing on the competency of a defendant when there is
evidence that ra1se~iquestions as to that competency. Hill v~ State, 473 So.2d
1253, 1257 (Fhi. J9a5)citingPate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375 (1966). A trial court
is further burdened with the responsibility.ofensuring the defendant remain,
competent throughout the course ofthe proceedings. ,Kilgore v.State, 688 So.2d
895 (Fla~ 1996)~ reh~g f!enied, (Fla. 1997). Such an obligation is ongoing and the
trial court must remain receptive to changes in circumstances. Culbreath v. State,'
903 So.2d 338' (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). This burden is "a great one~' and requires trial
cOurts to be '~very diligemtin ascertaining competency." Fuse v. State, 642' So.2d
1142, 1146 (FJa; 4th DCA 1994).
. When j reasdIiable ground to doubt the'defendant's competency arises, the
court musHnUi1edia~iyorder a time for a'hearing. Fla. R Crim. P; 3.210(b).
Within twentY days ~ofthe·order, a hearing must be conqucted. Id. But prior to the
hearing,
defendant must be examined, by no more than three, mid no fewer than
. two experts. ~ see also Fla. Stat. § 916.115(1)(b).Whenfewet than two experts
are appointed, the Flo,ri9a Supreme Court has ruled that ''there is nO doubt that the
trialjudge'erred;" J)'01eo-Yalgezy: State, 531 So.2d 1347,1348 (Fla. 1988).
Such error c:onstitut~s reversible error so long as the defense properly objects.
Graydon v. State, 502 So.2d 25,26 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), andD'Oleo-Valde~ 531
So.2d at 1348 (lioldmg that a failure to object waives the two expert minimum
requirement).
.
Receritly,'my office has seen cases where improper competency evaluations
conducted itl'severai different counties' circuit courts. For example,' in one
observed a competency procedure whereby the court
Pinellas County case~
ordered a compe~ency evaluation by only one expert and thereafter found the .
defendant to be competent without the benefit of an actual competency hearing. A
similar procedure was recently observed in an Orange County case. Likewise, my
office has reviewed numerous cases where trial attorneys have either disregarded
clear wamjng signs 'indicating incompetency~ or, just as bad, taken it upon
themselves to make a detennination of competency without the benefit of a mental
health exp~rt~ Such errors potentially deprive criminal defendants ofthe ability to
face ,the charges .~ga!nst them 'while competent. This means that an abuse of the
required ·coinpetertcyprocedurescan result in a defendant facing trial while unable
to' adequately cilmmtinicate witJt or assist defense counsel with trial preparation.
When a defendant's competency is reasonably in question, a competency
hearing isabs'olutely r~quired. Fowler v. State, 255 So.2d 513 (Fla. 1971); see ;
also )30Sgs'y. State; 575 So.2d 1274, 1275'(Fla. 1991) (when doubt as to
C()mpetency exists, the pro,?edtires set forth in the Rule are "mandatory."). Failure
to conduct said he~ng de~es the defendant'his fundamental right to a
constitutionally d.dc!t]Uate d~tenninationofcompetency. Watts v. State, 593 So.2d

the

we

9

Florida PriSOD Legal Perspeetives
198. (Fla. 1992). When the trial court fails to act in accord with the dictates of
Rule 3.210, or when defense counsel is i~effective for faili~g to see that. the proper'
competency procedures are followed, the remedy should be vacation of the
judgment and sentence with direct,ions to the State that re-prosecution can only
occur after a full and adequate determination of competency to stand, trial.. This is
because a hearing on competency to stand trial cannot be held retrospectively.
State v. W.S.L., 485 ~0.2d 421 (Fhi. 1986); Pridgen y. State, 531 So.2d 951 (Fla.
1988); and, Fin!destein v. State, 574 So.2d 1164 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
The case of Hill v. State, 473 So.2d 1253 (Fla. 1985) is illustrative of the
above-addressed issues. In Hill y. State, 473 So.2d 1253 (Fla. 1985), the
defendant was convict~d offirst degree murder. Hill filed a Rule 3.850 Motion for
Post~onviction Relief. Id. at 1254. In his 3.85p Hill challenged his conviction on
the grounds that circumstances existed at trial which required the trial court to
hold a hearing on his competency to stand trial. Id. The trial court conducted a
modified evidentiary hearing on Hill's competency to stand trial. At said hearing
the court heard testimony from Hill's trial counsel and defense investigator, but
directed that all other testimony be submitted in the form of depositions.
At Hill's evidentiary hearing a litany of information was presented that
demonstrated that at the time of his trial Mr. Hill was mentally retarded and
suffered from grand mal epileptic seizures. Hh at 1254. The defense investigator
testified thathe had trouble extracting sufficient information from Hill in order to
conduct an investigation. Id. at 1255. Additionally, there was a psychological
evaluation of Mr. Hill by 'a prison psychologist an4 classificatioIJ specialist that
reflected that Hill was of borderline intelligence, illiterate, and epileptic. Id.
The record in Hill further reflected that liill's trial cOWlsel did not ,
understand the distinction between cC?mpetency to stand trial an.d competency at
the time ofthe offense. Hill's trial counsel testified that he resolved the issue of
. Hill's sanity by interviewing Hill and his family. Id. at 1256. Counsel stated that
he was able to determine that Hill knew right from wrong 'and therefore eliminated
any possibility of an insanity defense as well as any claim that Hill was not
competent to stand trial. Id.
At Hill's 3.850 evidentiary hearing, the trial court also heard testimony from
the investigating police officers. The officers testified that they had no problem
communicating with Mr. Hill., The State relied on the police officers' testimony
and the prison psychologist's report to support their contention that Hill was not
entitled to a competency hearing.
,
After hearing all evidence the trial court denied Mr. Hill postconviction
relief. The Hill Court held that the initial failure of the trial court to hold a
competency evaluation, prior to trial, deprived Mr. Hill of a fair trial. Id. at 1259..
Such a competency hearing was constitutionally required under the circumstances.
ML Furthennore, the Hill Court held that such a competency hearing cannot be
held retroactively because "a defendant's due processrigItts would,not pe
.adequately protected under that type of procedure." ~ at 1259. quoting Drape y.
10

Florida Prison Legal Penpeetives
Missouri, 420 U.S. 164 (1975). As such, Hill's Judgmentand Sentence was
reversed and his case was remanded for a new trial if Hill was found to be
competent to once again face the charges.
For any defet:ldants that have been convicted in circumstances where
competency to proceed to trial was questionable, I would recommerid further
researching the above addressed authorities. It may turn out that the trial court
used inadequate procedures to evaluate the competency or that trial counsel was
ineffective in failing to properly investigate competency. In either case,
postconviction relief may be available via a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure
3.850 Motion for Postconviction Relief..
.

Loren Rhoton is a member in good standing with the Florida Bar
and a member ofthe Florida Bar Appeliate Practice Section; Mr.
Rhoton practices almost exClusively in the postconviction/lJppellate .
area ofthe law, both at the State and F:ederal Level. He.has assisted
hundreds ofincarcerated persons with their cases and has numeroUs .
written appellate opinions.•

DavidW. Collins, Attorney at Law
Former state·prosecutor with more than 20 years of criminal law experience
"AV". rated by Martindale-Hubbell
Bar.
register
of Preeminent Lawyers
.
.
.
.

.

.

Your voice in Tallahassee representing prisoners in all areas of post-conviction relief:
•

... Appeals
. . Plea Bargain Rights
3.800 Motions
Sentencing and Scoresheet Errors'
Green, Tripp, Karchesky. Heggs cases
3.850 Motions
State and Federal Habeas Corpus
Jail-time Credit Issues
Gain-time Eligibility Issues
Writs of Mandamus .
Clemency
Habitualization I~sues
Probation Revocation Issues

."

Write me today about your case!
David W. Collins. Esquire
.
P.O. Box 541
Monticello. FL 32345
(850) 997-8111
"The hiring ofa lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon'advertisements. Before you decide,
ask me to send you free written information about my qualifications and experience."
11

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives

Friends, the Florida Governor's Commission in the Administration of Lethal Injection met Monday, Feb. 19,2007. The
Commission was ordered. by former governor Bush to investigate the botched execution of Angel Diaz on Dec. 13,2006
and to recommend changes to Florida's lethal injection method of piJtting prisoners to death. There was testimony from a
secret Execution Medical Team member. The Commissioners and audience were visibly .rattled by his menacing
testimony. He has been involved in 84 executions for 5 states and the Federal Government. This is the true nature of the
death chamber. Executions are not solemn, medical or humane events. Mark Elliott Director, Floridians for Alternatives to
the Death Penalty mark@fdap.org
Dear FPLP,I was recently given a copy of your "Special ParoleIssue" to read. I have a friend who has been in the Florida
Prison System for 27 years and I am very interested in how the Florida Paroie Commission works (and doesn't work). I
am grateful to see that they are being exposed. This may just be a little thing to mention but I do not think there is any
notification to families and/or others sending money to prisoners accounts that part of the money is going to be deducted
and I do not know how much is deducted if it is a flat fee or if it is a percentage of what is sent to them. It would seem to
me this information should be given by phone or on the DOC website. Folores F. VB FL
Dear FPLP, I want to address a few issues pertaining to the lack of faith in grievances and lack of unity amongst inmates
serving time in FDOC. I have been incarcerated almost 2 decades and at one time inmates of all cultures, ethnic
backgrounds have fought for prison rights and each other when it comes to misconduct by staff. This breed that has
overflowed Florida prisons since 1995 need to be segregated, they don't know what doing time is about. The system love~
you guys-you bring all this slime into the system, hating on each other, too ignorant to pick up a book, dictionary or even
go to school. What is wrong with you? Mexico
FPLP, I have done many years in prison and I have learned only one thing from this so called rehabilitation that is hate,
something I never really knew till I came to prison. We are sent to prison to correct negative behaviors and gain some
form of rehabilitation but at FDOC no one receives any form of rehabilitation. Because any self esteem or self help we
may receive is shot down from the constant abuse from the staff and ·officers. Most of the women in prison have been
beaten and battered all their lives in one form or another. They are women who need nurturing and care to learn to love
themselves'. So they can realize they are someone special and important in life. How does anyone expect us to heal and
change and return to society to become normal citizens when we are .belittled, beaten,' battered, raped and sexually
violated on a daily basis. I and two other female inmates were sexually violated with DNA to prove it, it was reported and
nothing was done. All three of us wrote grievances and nothing was done. The response to.our grievance was that the
inspector general's office would deal with it, still nothing has been done. There are a few of us who have the courage to
speak out,they cannot break our ~pirit. R LCI
Dear FPLP, I wanted to let your readers know some of the things ,going on with the visiting at Apalachee CI E. The
visiting is very controlling. Upon arrival the officer assigns the visitor a table to sit at, smoke breaks are given one per
hour for 15 minutes at a time outside. The in~ate sits in a "special" chair facing the officer's desk. Outside is the same.
there are wooden benches and you cannot sit on the bench next to the inmate you are visiting. he sits on a metal chair. If
I'm not mistaken none ofthis is in Chapter 33 rules. DO

Letters sent to FPLP may be used in this section. All letters are subject to editing for length and content. Only initials will be used to
identify senders and their location. Letters are welcome from all FPLP members. Address letters to: Editor, FPLP. P.O. Box I S II,
Christmas, FL 32709.

12.

Florida Prison Legal Penpectives

Loren D. Rhoton
Postconviction

Attor~ey.

I

-----~~---

•
•
•
•
•
•

.

Direct Appeals
Belated Appeals
Rule 3.850 Motions
Sentence Corrections
New Trials
Federal·Habeas Corpus Petitions

412 East Madison Street, Suite 1111
. Tampa, Florida 33602
(813) 226-3138
Fax (813) 221-2182
Email: lorenrhoton@rhotonpostconviction.com
.Website: www.rhotonpostconviction.com·
The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisements.
Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information ;;;tbout our qualifications.

BUY THE BOOK·- ON SALE NOW
POSTCONVlCTION RELIEF FOR THE FLORIDA PRISONER
. A Compilation ofSelected Postconviction Corner Articles
A collection of Loren Rhoton's Postconviction Corner articles is now available in one
convenient book geared towards Florida inmates seeking justice intheir cases. Insights based
on professional experience, case citations, and references to the relevant rules.ofprocedure
are provided. This b,?ok is specifically directed toward those pursuing postconviction relief.

To order, send $20.00 in the form of a money order, cashier's check or inmate
bank check (no stamps, cash or personal checks please) to the address above, or
. order online at www.rhotonpostconviction.com.
.

13

Florida Prison L~~al·Perspectives

Thefollowing are sl4mmaries ofrecent state andfederal cases that may be useful to or have a significant impact on Florida prisoners.
Readers should always read the full opinion as published in the Florida Law WeelcJy(FIa. L Weekly}; Florida Law WeelcJy Federal
(Fla. L. Weekly Federal); Southern Reporter 2d (So. 2d); Supreme Court Reporter (S. Ct.); Federal Reporter 3d (F.3d); or the
Federal Supplement 2d (F.Supp. 2d), since these summaries are for general information only.

FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
Corbblin v. State, 31 Fla.L.Weekly

14

S879 (Fla. 12121106)
Corbblin
Bush's
caw
presented the Florida Supreme Court
with the questions of what remedy a
prisoner is to use and which circuit
court to file it in when challenging a
sentenc~reducing
credit
determination
made
by
the
Department of Corrections (DOC)
(i.e. loss of gain time, provisional
credits, etc., that 'is determined by
DOC).
.
DOC had denied Bush
additional provisional credits he
claimed he was entitled to through
administrative remedies.
After
exhausting those remedies, Bush
filed a petitioner for writ of
mandamus regarding DOC's denial
in the Leon County Circuit Court.
The circuit court dismissed his
petition for lack ofjurisdiction, citing
Schmidt v. Crusoe, 878 So.2d 361,
361-62 (Fla. 2003) (which held that
"an inmate's petition for writ of
mandamus challenging a loss of gain·
time is a collateral criminal
proceeding and not a civil lawsuit as
contemplated
by
the
Prison .
Indigency Statue"). The circuit court
opined that it' did . not have
jurisdiction over <follateral criminal
proceedings stemming from a
conviction and sentence rendered by
another circuit court.
. Bush
Consequently,
followed the circuit court's opinion
and filed his petition in his original
sentencing court, the Seminole
County Circuit Court. That court
also dismissed Bush's p~tition,
stating, ''The court cannot entertain a
civil petition in a criminal

case...Seminole
is
not
the
. appropriate venue. for this cause of
action."
The appellate court
affirmed, ruling that a petition for
writ of mandamus' "is a civil_action"
and that venue properiy lies in Leon
County, where DOC's headquarters
is located. See: Bush v. State, 886
So.2d 339 (Fla. Sib DCA 2004).'
Thus, the Florida Supreme Court
granted review of Bush's case based
on the apparent conflict with
Schmidt. There, Bush claimed that
the appellate court erred in affirming
the dismissal of his petition; he
contended that the petition should
have been transferred to the proper .
circuit court. In reply, the State
contended that Schmidt should be
overruled because it has created
confusion concerning both the proper
remedy and the proper venue for
adjudicating such claims.
The first issue the Florida
Supreme Court looked at was "The
Proper Remedy." Under that issue it
was explained that such claims as
Bush's that regarded a gain time or
provisional' release credit that was
determined. by DOC, after the
prisoner exhausted administrative
remedies, he or she generally may
seek relief in an original proceeding
filed in circuit court .as an'
extraordinary writ petition. In such a
case, if the prisoner alleges
entitlement to immediate release, a
petition for writ of. habeas corpus is
the proper remedy; whereas if the
prisoner is not alleging entitlement to
immediate release, then a petition for
writ of mandamus is the proper
remedy.
The State, in its contention
that Schmidt should be overruled,
stated that the language in Schmidt

may be read as authorizing prisoners

to challenge sentence-reducing credit .

determinations
via
collateral
remedies rather. than extraordinafy
writ petitions. 'The Florida Supreme
Court disagreed with the State's
contentions and stated that the
Schmidt case has no such language.
First, although· in Schmidt it stated
that a "gain-time challenge is
. analogous to a collateral challenge to
a sentence in a criminal proceeding;
it did not state that it is a collateral .
challenge. Second, although it was
stated in Schmidt that "[this] gaintime challenge should be considered
a 'collateral criminal proceeding,'"
the Schmidt court did so in the
context of the prisoner indigency
statue, and the statement was limited
to that context. Accordingly, to
clarify this part of the issue, the
Florida Supreme Court held that the
proper remedy for such sentencereducing credit determinations by the
DOC, where administrative remedies
have been exhausted and entitlement
to immediate release is not alleged,
continues to be a mandamus petition
filed in circuit court.
The next issue the Florida
Supreme Court looked ·at was "The
Proper Venue." Urider this issue the
difference between venue and
jurisdiction in regard to the filing of
a mandamus petition .was explained
first:
"Venue is one thing;
jurisdiction is another. They are not
synonymous. Venue concems 'the
privilege of being accountable to a
Court in a particular .location'.
Jurisdiction is 'the power to act,' the
. authority to adjudicate the subject
See:
Williams v.
matter."
Fe"entino, 199 So.2d 504, 510 (Fla.

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
2d DCA 1967). It was explained in
the Bush review that although all
circuit courts in the state have
jurisdiction to issue writs of.
mandamus, see article V, section
5(a), Florida Constitution, the
question in Bush's case is where in
the state a party should be held to
answer such A petition, which is a
question of venue.
On this issue, the Florida
Supreme Court held that because
such claims as Bush's were
determined by DOC, the county for
which DOC's headquarters is located
in the county in which to file the
petition, Leon County Circuit Court.
Finally, ,the last issue the
Florida Supreme Court reviewed was
the "Transfer versus Dismissal" of a
mandamus petition when filed in the
wrong circuit court. After citing to
several analogous issues addressed in
the Florida Constitution it was
concluded that transfer to the proper
court rather than dismissal is' the
preferred remedy in such a case.
Accordingly,
the
Fifth
District's opinion that Bush's case
should be held in the Leon County
Circuit Court was affirmed; however,
the order that affirmed the dismissal
of Bush's petition was quashed. The
case was remanded with instructions
to transfer it to the Second Judicial
Circuit Court in Leon County for
further proceedings.

DISTRICT
APPEAL

COURTS

OF

,simmons
v.
McDonough,
31
Fla.L.Weekly 02920 (Fla. lsi DCA
11121/06)
Johnny Simmons sought
. certiorari review from a circuit
court's order imposing costs and fees
against his prison account after he
filed a mandamus petition that
constituted a collateral. criminal
proceeding pursuant to 57.085(10),
Fla. Statues.
The First District Court of
Appeals granted review of Simmons'
case and opined that the lower court

had improperly imposed costs and
fees against the prisoner's trust fund
account.
Accordingly,
the
lower
court's order imposing the lien
against Simmons' prison account
was quashed. It was also instructed
tharthe lower court should direct an
order to reimburse any funds
withdrawn to satisfy the improper
lien. See: Cason v. Crosby, 892
So.2d 536 (Fla. III DCA 2005). Also
see other recent related cases:
Gaffney
v.
McDonough,
31
Fla.L.Weekly 02919 (Fla. 1st DCA
2006); De/gado v. McDonough, 31
Fla.L.Weekly D2919 (Fla. lSI DCA
2006); Hill v. McDonough, 31
Fla.L.Weekly D3016 (Fla. 1st DCA
2006); and Finn v. McDonough, 3I
Fla.L.Weekly 03019 (Fla. lSI DCA
2006).
Santiago v. State, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
02925 (Fla. 4th DCA 11/22/06)
Nomar Santiago appealed
the denial of his motion to suppress
evidence found
following an
investigatory traffic stop. Santiago
had preserved the issue for appellate
review prior to entering his guilty
plea in the lower CQurt.
The background of this case
began when a police officer was
working an unrelated case, observed
Santiago
flash
his
vehicle's
headlights as another vehicle entered
the parking area where Santiago was
parked. Afterward, the other v~hicle
drove toward and parked next to
Santiago's vehicle. Santiago walked
over and briefly spoke with the other
vehicle's occupant, then walked back
to his own vehicle, soon returning to
the other vehicle again, on the
passenger side.
Thereafter, both
vehicles left the area, with the
observing officer following Santiago.
While the· officer followed and
stopped Santiago, he directed another
officer to follow and stop the other
vehicle involved.
[Apparently a
search took place and contraband
was found in one or both of the
vehicles causing Santil\go's arrest,

the case did not elaborate on that
subject.]
At trial, the arresting officer
testified that he was not sure of what,
if anything, passed between Santiago
and the occupant of the other vehicle,
but concluded that he had witnessed
a hand-t<rhand drug transaction.
Consequently, Santiago introduced a
dispatch tape recording of the
incident where the officer was heard
stating, "I don't know if that's a
hand-to-hand or what ·the story is".
Subsequently, Santiago sought and
was denied suppression. The trial
court reasoned that the totality of
circumstances, "as interpreted by an
experienced officer," estjlblished a
reasonable suspicion
to
stop
Santiago'S vehicle.
The appellate court cited to
numerous cases that involved
interpretations of the law regarding
whether an officer has the reasonable
suspicion needed to justify an
investigatory stop. Following the
analysis of those cases and
Santiago's, it was concluded that
there was not a reasonable suspicion
to justify a stop in Santiago's case.
While the officer believed that he
was acting on "more than a hunch"
in .making the stop, the blinking of
car lights and followed by an
apparent exchange of something,
otherwise .completely innocent acts,
are not, alone, sufficient to support a
reasonable and founded suspicion
that a crime had occurred.
Therefore, it was concluded
that the trial court erred in denying
Santiago's motion to suppress. Thus,
Santiago's conviction was reversed
and the case remanded for further
proc~edings.

Wilson v. Stale, 3\ Fla.L.Weekly
02957 (Fla. 2d DCA 11129/06)
Anthony J. Wilson petitioned
the Second District Court of Appeal
for certiorari· review' of a circuit
court's order denying his habeas
cOrPus petition that contested the
revocation of his conditional release
by the Florida Parole Commission
(Commission).

IS

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
A circuit court, sitting in an
appellate capacity, is required to
review the record considered by the
Commission prior to entering a final
order. In Wilson's case however, the
Commission failed to provide the
complete record for the circuit court
to review, as it is required to do.
See: . Welsch v. State, 823 So.2d 310,
311-12 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) and

Williams v. Flo. Parole Commission,
625 So.2d 926, 940 (Fla. I It DCA
1993).
The circuit court had relied
only on the Commission's revocation
order in denying Wilson's habeas
petition. Therefore, it was opined
that in denying the petition without
full and accurate infonnation, the
circuit court violated Wilson's
procedural due process rights, and
thus departed from the essential
requirements oflaw.
Accordingly,
Wilson's
petition for certiorari was granted,
quashing the circuit court's order. It
was further instructed that on
remand, the circuit· .court was to
reconsider Wilson's petition with the
required Commission's response,
which should contain all records
from Wilson's file and was
considered when the Commission
revoked the conditional release.
Zink v. State, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
02972 (Fla. 4th DCA 11/29/06)
Joseph J. Zink appealed the
denial of his rule 3.800(a) motion
filed in a lower court. In the motion
he had claimed that his 1990 written
habitual offender sentence to
concurrent forty-year prison terms
for kidnapping and robbery did not
comport with the sentencing court's
oral pronouncement.
In Zink's case it was found
that although the lower court failed
to expressly state that the sentences
were habitual offender sentenc;es, the
records did reveal that the lower
court found Zink to be a habitual
offender.
In its analysis, the
appellate court cited to a prior case
that was similar, Scanes v. State, 876
So.2d 1238 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004),

16

which was on appeal from an order
denying a rule 3.800(a) motion. As
in Zink's case, the trial court in
Scanes made oral findings that the
defendant qualified as a habitual
offender and imposed enhanced
sentences, but did not say the
sentences were imposed "as"
habitual felony offender sentences.
The records of Scanes' case in the
lower court revealed that the
sentencing court intended to, and did,
contemporaneously sentence the
defendant as a habitual offender.
"Magic words are not necessary to
establish what the court intended."
Id. at 1239-40.
Consequently, the same
conclusion was made in regard to
Zink's case. It was further noted that
under the circumstances. Zink had
failed to even allege what would
amount to a variance between the
oral pronouncement and that of the
written one.
Accordingly, Zink's habitual
felony offender sentence was
affirmed.

Davis v. Stale, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
03165 (Fla. 151 DCA 12/18/06)
Keith Davis presented the
appellate court with an issue that
involved whether a search and
seizure that was preformed on him
was legal.
The background of this case
involved Davis as a passenger of a
vehicle that was stopped by law
enforcement.
After the officer
received consent' from the driver to
search the vehicle, he went to the
passenger side and asked Davis to
exit the vehicle. As soon as Davis
opened the car door, the officer told
Davis to place his hands on the top of
the car. While in that position, the
officer inquired whether he had
anything illegal on his person, and
Davis responded that he did not. The
officer then asked and received
consent from Davis to search his
person.
The search of Davis
revealed a bag that contained a
quarter
pound
of marijuana.
Subsequently, Davis was arrested.

At trial. it was undisputed
that, until Davis had been frisked, the
officer had no reason to believe that
Davis had committed any crime. or
that he was armed. Consequently.
Davis sought and was denied
suppression of the marijuana found,
and the appeal followed.
A very lengthy review and
analysis of several cases involving
similarity to Davis', and it was
concluded that Davis' consent
immediately after being asked to get
out of the car and place his hands on
the roof of the car was no more than
submission to authority. Therefore,
the consent was involuntarily given
and Davis was illegally seized for
Fourth Amendment purposes. Thus,
it was opined that the marijuana
found should have suppressed, and
that it was error for the trial court to
have denied Davis' motion.
It was found' that the trial
court's ruling on the motion to
suppress was dispositive, as such,
Davis' conviction was reversed and
the case was remanded with
directions that the trial court enters
an order discharging Davis.

Anderson v. Slale, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
03032 (Fla. 2d DCA 12/6/06)
Philip Anderson appealed an
order that revoked his community
control for not completing a drug
program he was ordered to complete,
but was not ordered to complete it'
within a specified time limit, where
sufficient time remained within his
community control period to do so.
The appellate court stated
that it has consistently held that. if
sufficient time in a probationary
period remains for a probationer to
complete a drug treatment program, a
trial court may not revoke probation
for failure to complete the program
when the conditions of probation or
community control did not specify
that the program be completed within
a certain time frame or within a
certain number ofattempts.
The State had further
contended that Anderson had also
violated a condition that he was to

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
"comply with all rules and . Shelton v. State, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
D3066 (Fla. 4th DCA 1216/06)
regulations
of
the
program
Clifford Shelton appealed a
and...participate" in 'the assigned
activities. However, the appellate . trial court's order that denied his rule
3.800(a) motion where he claimed he
court found that no such condition
was entitled to credit for time served
was ever imposed by the sentencing
in jail prior to sentencing and after
court.
sentencing but before transport to
Accordingly,
Anderson's
prison.
revocation was reversed and the case
One who is sentenced to
remanded for further proceedings.
prison is not entitled to seek jail
•
credit in the trial court for postBaptiste v. Guffanti (a Public
sentencing time served. Such issue
Defender), 31 Fla.L.Weekly D3055
(Fla. 3rd DCA 12/6/06)
.
is properly raised with the
Rillio Baptiste sought a
See:
Department of Corrections.
rehearing in the appellate court . Schuellier v. State, 931 So.2d 1044
(Fla.4lh DCA 2006); Milne v. State,
regarding its denial of a mandamus
807 So.2d 725 (Fla. 4lh DCA 2002).
petition he filed seeking to compel a
However, the appellate court
specially appointed public defender
.did find that the trial court did err
(SAPD), who had filed an Anders
insofar as summarily denying the·
brief and motion to withdraw in
portion of Shelton's motion where he
Baptiste's direct appeal, to provide
claimed
entitlement
to
prehim with a copy of the record on
sentencing jail time served.
appeal without charge. (See original
Accordingly, the appellate
appellate opinion denying Baptiste's
court reversed and remanded for the
petition at 29 Fla.L.Weekly D5886
trial court to consider SheJton's
(Fla. 3d OCA 3110/04».
claim for jail credit on time served
On
consideration
of
prior to sentencing and affirmed the
Baptiste's motion for a rehearing, the
denial of post-sentencingjail credit.
appellate court withdrew its original
opinion and substituted the following
Epps v. State, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
opinion: "As a result ofthis case, the
02873 (Fla. 4th DCA 11115/06)
court has revised its standard order
Felton Epps sought certiorari
for Anders proceedings. The revised
review of a. trial court's order
order now specifies that in Anders
prohibiting him from filing further
proceedings, the attorney who has
pro se motions. He complained that
moved to withdraw must supply the
the trial court entered the order
defendant with a copy of the
without giving him notice and
complete record on appeal in
without issuing an order for him to
addition to the Anders brief." It was
show cause why he shPuld not be
also noted that "record on appeal"
includes transcripts and that the
prohibited from appearing pro se.
It has been held by the
SAPO is entitled to reimbursement
Florida Supreme Court that before
for the expenses of copying and
prohibiting further pro se filings, the
mailing the record on appeal at no
court must give a pro se litigant
charge to the defendant, as these
notice and an opportunity to show
expenses are incurred in the course
cause why sanctions should not be
ofthe appointed repres~ntation.
Therefore, Baptiste's petition
imposed. See: Stale v. Spencer, 751
So.2d 47 (Fla. 1999).
was granted, but formal issuance of
The appellate court refused
the writ was withheld, being the
to aCcept the State's contentions that
appellate court was "certain that the
Epps had adequate notice by the
SAPO will comply with this
order and opportunity to respond by
opinion."
way of a motion for rehearing. It
was opined that a motion for

rehearing is not a sufficient,
meaningful opportunity to be heard.
To be fair or meaningful, the
opportunity to be heard must be
provided "before rights are decided."
See: Peoples Bank of Indian River
County v. State Dept. of Banking &
Finance, ·395 So.2d 521, 524 (Fla.
1981).
Therefore, Epps' petition
was granted, the trial court's order
was quashed, and the case was
remanded for further proceedings.
Yarusso v. State, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
D2900 (Fla. 2dDCA 11117/06)
Corey Yarusso appealed his
conviction and sentence for resisting
or obstructing an officer with
violence. He contended thafthe trial
court should have granted his motion
for judgment of acquittal because the
State failed to prove all of the
elements ofthe offense.
The background of this case
began when Yarusso was observed
by two plain clothed officers driving,
around in a well lit dealership's car
lot that was closed around 10:45 p.m.
one night. Yarusso finally stopped
his truck, got out, and proceeded to
walk down a row of cars. The two
officers then approached Yarusso
and one of them asked him if he was
'~ust
shopping" and Yarusso
responded that he was. Yarusso was
then asked if he had any
identification, whereupon Yarusso
inquired whether they were "cops or
something." Yarusso was answered
in the affirmative and was shown law
enforcement badges by both officers.
Yarusso then replied that his
identification was in his truck and he
proceeded in that direction with the
officers following. Upon reaching
where the truck was parked, one
officer went to the rear to view the
tag number while the other officer
stayed near .yarusso.
Yarusso
opened the driver's door and, after
fumbling around by the front seat, he
jumped in the driver's seat, locked
the door, started the ignition, and
began backing up. The officer that
had been near him yelled for Yarusso 17

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
to "Stop. Don't do that. Stop."
However, Yarusso put the truck in
drive and sped off. While taking off,
the truck's rearview mirror struck the
hand 'of the yelling officer.
Following a high-speed chase,
Yarusso was arrested.
On
appeal,
Yarusso
contended, an~ the State did not
dispute that the interaction between
him and the officers was a
consensual encounter rather than an
investigative detention. Indeed, one
of the officer's testimony was that
y arusso's action of being at a closed
de~lership
was, not necessarily
unusual because "they have found
other people even at 2;00 a.m.
shopping for cars so ther don't get
bothered bya sales person." As
such, the appellate court opined then
that the qu~stion, was whether
Yarusso's actions· can support a
conviction
for
resisting
or
obstructing an officer with violence.
,
It was opined that to prove
such offense, the State must show
that the defendant: (1) knowingly (2)
resisted, obstructed, or opposed a law
enforcement officer (3) who was in
the lawful execution of any legal
duty (4) by offering or' doing
violence to his person. See: Section
843.01, Fla. Statues (2004); and Siale
v. Henriquez" 485 So.2d 414, 415,
(Fla. 1986). Of those requirements,
what was disputed in Yarusso's case
was whether the officers were
"engaged in the lawfulexecution 'of a
legal duty" when the violent act
occurred and whether Yarusso's act
of driving
away
constituted
"resisting."
It was opined that the
hallmark of a consensual encounter
is . a citizen's right- to either
voluntarily comply with the officers'
requests or terminate the encounter at
any time. See; Terry v. Ohiq, 392
U.S. 1,31-33 (1968); and Popple v.
Siale, 626 So.2d 185, 186 (Fla.
1993). Accord~l\gly, when a citizen
either verbally ends a consensual
encounter or takes some action 'that
unequivocally demonstrates an intent
to end the encounter, the consensual

18

'

encounter ceases. Any effort by the
officers to c~ntinue to detain the
citizen after that point falls outside
~he lawful ~xecution of the officers'
legal duties absent some founded
suspicion that the citizen has
committed, is committing, or is about
to commit a crime. See: Tillman v.
Siale, 934 So.2d 1263, 1273 (Fla.
2006).
In this case, when Yarusso
got into his truck, locked the door,
and started the ignition, he clearly
and unequivocally expressed his
intention to terminate the consensual
. encounter. It was opined that at that
.point, because the officers had no
reasonable, articulable suspicion that
Yarusso was involved in criminal
activity, the officers' effort to
continue' the encounter by telling
Yarusso to stop was improper. Thus,
when the alleged "act of violent
resistance" occurred as Yarusso
drove away, the officers were no
longer, engaged in the "lawful
execution of their legal duties" vis-avis Yarusso.
As to the dispute of whether
Yarusso resisted when he drove
away, it was noted that when there is
no basis for a temporary detention of
the individual under Terry, a
citizen's act of walking away from a
police officer cannot, as a matter of
law, ' constitute
resisting
or
obstructing an officer.
,
Accordingly, and after a
review of other case lllw regarding
the issues, the' appellate court
concluded that under the facts that
were presented,. Yarusso's conduct
was legally insufficient to support a
conviction for resisting an officer
with violence.
Thus, Yarusso's
conviction and sentence w~ reversed
and the case remanded.
Daly v. Siale, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
02645 (Fla. 2d DCA 10/25/06)
Ronald James Daly appealed
his resentencing, claiming he should
.have had <;ounsel at the resentencing
hearing.
Daly's resentencing was the
relief the lower court granted him
from the filing of his motion for

post-conviction relief. The relief was
granted based on a judicial error in
Daly's original sentence. Although
Daly did not waive his right to
counsel, in fact, he told the lower
court that he wanted counsel but
could not afford one, the lower court
resentenced him without counsel.
The appellate court opined
that a criminal defendant has the
right to counsel at a resentencing
hearing when the original sentencing
error was a judicial error rather than
a clerical error. See; Nickerson v.
Siale, 927 So.2d 114, 117 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2006); see also Wells v. Siale,
789 So.2d 1092, 1093 (Fla. 2d DCA
2001) ("An indigent prisoner is
entitled to the appointment of
cQunsel at resentencing following a
successful
motion
for
postconviction relief.") ,
Therefore, Daly's. sentence
was reversed and remanded for
resentencing, with counsel.
Carler v. Siale, 31 Fla.L.Weekly
02662 (Fla. 41h DCA 10/25/06)
Kevin Carter presented the
appellate court with the denial of his
ruie 3.800(a) motion from the lower
court. He claimed that the severity
level enhancement for the use of a
weapon or firearm should not have
been applied to his sentence.
Carter's offense occurred on
November 22, 1996. Following two
successful prior rule 3.800(a)
motions, the first pursuant to Beggs
v. Siale, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla. 2000),
he was resentenced to 308 months. '
What Carter claimed in this case was
that the 1994 scoresheet under which
he
was
resentenced
was
miscalculated because the primary
offense, a second degree felony
murder with a firearm, should have
been scored at level 9, with 91
points" but instead it was scored at
level I0, with 116 points.
The trial court had denied
. Carter's motion based on a response
by the State which admitted that
second degree felony murder is a
level 9 offense, bur agued that
section 775.087{1),. Fla. Statues,
(1994), provides that, when the lever

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
of ~ offense is reclassified for use of
a weapon or fireann, the sentencing
level is increased.
The appellate court pointed
out, however, that the raising of the
sentencing level of an offense
pursuant to section 775.087(1) was
added by Chapter 95-184, sec. 19, at
1708 Laws of Florida. Chapter 95184 is the same session law that was
held 'to violate the single subject
requirement in Heggs. Thus, the
severity level enhancement should
not have been applied to Carter's
resentencing. See: Reid v. State, 799
So.2d 394, 400 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
(which held that the one-level
increases for use of a firearm are not
applicable to a defendant who
committed the charged offense
within the window period· between
October I, 1995 and May 24, 1997).
After noting that the error
was not harmless, the appellate court
opined that .resentencing was
required in Carter's case, even under
the "could-have-been imposed" test
which the Fourth District has applied
to prior rule 3.800(a) motions, see
Brooks v. State, 930 So.2d 835 (Fla.
4lb DCA 2006), which certified
conflict with Wilson v. State, 913
So.2d 1277 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
But compare State v. Anderson, 905
Sb.2d 111 (Fla. 2005) (where it was
held that if the' scoresheet error is
raised ei~r on direct appeal or by a
rule 3.850 motion; the test is whether
,the error was harmless under the
"would-have-been-imposed test).
. Apparently the State tried to
argue that Carter's motion was
untimely because it was filed more
than two-years after the most recent
resentencing became final, because
the appellate court opined that that
argument was without merit. See:
Higgins v. State, 890 So.2d 519, 51920 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) ("Scorcsheet
calculation errors may be corrected
pursuant to rule 3.800(a) 'at al1Y
time.''').
'Accordingly,
Carter's
sentence was reversed an the case
was . remanded
for
further
proceedings. •

TYPING
SERVICE
Computer - Typewriter
ALL KINDS OF TYPING

Including uut not limited to:
Legal Briefs. Newsletters, Articles,
Books, Manuscripts,
Text Documents, Database, Charts, .
Forms, Ayer~, Envelops, ETC,
Black I Color Printing & Copying
~Plleial

'Ralillil for prililOnllr$

FOR A FREE PRICE LIST AND
MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:

LET MY ~1.NGERS
DO YO CJ ~,.To,YP1. NG
.
Sandra ~.Thomas
.
POBox4178
Winter Park, FL 32793-4178

Advertise in FPLP
Reach new clients or customers through advertising in
Florida Prison Legal Perspectives. To obtain advertising and
.rate information write or email
us at:

FPLP
Attn: Advertising
15232 E. Colonial Dr.
Orlando, FL 32826-5134

Or
fplp@aol.com

Phone: 407-579-5563

MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
•

Please check the mailing label on this issue of FPLP to
determine when you need to renew so you don't miss an
issue. On the top line of the mailing label will be- a date, such
as *-Nov 07*-. That Indicates the month and year that your
FPLAO membership dues are paid up to. Please renew your
membership by completing the above form and mailing It
and the appropriate dues amount to the address given a
month or two before the date on the mailing label so that the
membership rolls and mailing list can be updated within
.plenty of time. Thanksl

19

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives

Resource List
February 2007

FWRIDA

Government
Governor (Charlie Christ)
PL-05, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001
850/488-4441
www.myflorida.com
Attorney Ge~eral
PL-o I, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
850/487-1963
www.oag.state.fl.us
De~entofCp~tions

Secretary Jim McDonough
2601 Blair Stone Rd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2500
850/ 488-7480
www.dc.state.flus

Department of Health
2585 Merchants Row Blvd.
TaJlahassee, FL 32399
850/245-4321
www.dob.state.fl.us
Department of Law Enforcement
(FDLE)
POBox 1489
Tallahassee, FL 32302-1489
850/410-7000
www.fdle.state.fl.us
Department ofState
PL-02, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250
850/245-6500
www.dos.state.fl.us
Website contains all state agencies'
rules (Florida Administrative Code) and
"Florida
Administrative
Weekly"
detailing current agency rulemaking
info.

Office of Executive Clemency
(Parole Commission)
260 I Blair StoDe Rd.
Bldg. C: Room 229
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2450
850/488-2952

20

Office of Vital Statistics
PO Box 210
Jacksonville, FL 32231-0042
- 904 /359-6900
Maintains state birth/death certificates,
etc.

Parole Commission
2601 Blair Stone Rd., Bldg. C
Tall~aSsee, FL ·32399-2450
850/922-0000
www.fuc.state.fl.us
Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850
850/413-6055
www.floridapsc.com
Regulates in-state utilities, including
telephone services.

Florida House of Representatives
402 S. Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399·1300
850/488-1157 (Clerk)
www.myfloridahouse.gov
Florida Senate
404 S. Monroe Street
Tallahassee; FL 32399-1100
850/487-5270 (Secretary)
www.flsenate.gov
Website contain contact iiifo for all state
legislators; a copy ofall current Florida
laws (statutes): and bills that have been
introduced in the Legislature and their
history, including in many instances
"staff
analyses"
valuable
for
understanding legislative intent.
FWRlDA
Legal Aid / Advocacy Organizations

Florida Prisoners' Legal Aid Org., Inc.
PO Box 660-387
Chuluota, FL 32766
www.floridaprisons.net
fplp@aol.com

advocacy to state prisoners and their
families and advocates.
Conducts
grassroots organizing of prisoners'
families and handles impact litigation
concerning civil rights / administrative
law affecting prisoners, their families
and children. Publishes bi-monthly news
journal.
"Florida
Prison
Legal
Perspectives. ..

Florida Justice Institute
2870 First Union Financial Ctr.
200 S. Biscayne Blvd.
Miami, FL 33131-2310
305/358-2081
Fax: 305/358-0910
www.FloridaLawHelp.com
Services: Handles civil rights litigation
concerning jail / prison conditions.
·Makes refe"als for damage / civil-rights
cases.
Prison advocacy, lobbying,
develops strategies for alternatives to
incarceration.

florida Institutional Legal Ser., Inc.
1II00C NW glb Street
Gainesville, FL 3260I
3521955-2260
F"ax: 352/955-2189
www.criminaljusticeforum.comlPrison_I
ssues_FilesIFILS
.
· Services: Legal assistance to Florida
state prisoners.
Post conviction
assistance to three prisons only: FSP,
VCI and FCI
Impact litigation:
· conditions of confinement, civil rights,
medical, etc. Some individual services.

Families & Friends for Committed
Victims, Inc.
P.O. Box 1426
Pinellas Park, FL 33780-1426
127/545-9268 or
727/424 -249
www,abettersolution,org
FFCV200 I@aol.com
Organize.sfamily memb€!rs andfriends of
inmates civilly committed or detained
under Florida's Jimmy Rice Act. Worlcs
to improve conditions at the Arcadia

.Services:
organization.

Membership-based
Provides information. /

Civil Detention Center. Publishes

Florida Prison Legal Penpeetives
newslelter. Needs members and.
donalions. Contactfor more info.

FLORIDA
BooksIPublleationslJournals

I&m!l
FLORIDA
Attorneys

Loren Rhoton. Attorney
Rhoton & Hayman, P.A.
412 E. Madison St, Ste. 1111
Tampa. FL 33602
813/226-3138
E-mail: rhotonI67@aol.com
Specializes in Florida post conviction,
direct appeals. sentence co"ections. new
trials. federal habeas corpus. 3.850.
3.800

David W. Collins, Attorney
PO Box 541
Monticello, FL 32345
8501"997-8111
Specializes in all area ofpost conviction
relief, including. appeals. 3.850. 3.800
state-federal habeas corpus. parole
.
hearings, clemency, elc.

Daniel D. Mazar, Attorney
2153 Lee Road
Winter Park, FL 32789
1-888-645:5352 (ToJl free)
407/645-5352
407/645-3224 (Fax)
Provides representation in Direct
Appeals.
Belated Appeals,
3.850
motions, 3.800 motions, State and Fed
Habeas Corpus, Delainen, and other
Post Conviction mailers. Over 30 yrs.
expo in criminal law.

Michael Ufferman, Attorney
660 E. Jefferson St
Tallahassee, FL 3230I
8501386-2345
lIIWW.ufferrnanlaw·com
Provides representation in State and
Federal Criminal Post Conviction
Motions. Payment plans available.
-The hiring of an attorney is an
.important decision that should· not be
based solely upon advertisements.
Before you decide, ask the aIIorney to
send you free written i"'onnation about
their qualtjications.

Continuing Legal Education Publications
(CLE)
CLE publications are produced by the
Florida Bar in collaboration with
LexisNexis. These are excellent books
covering Florida-spectjic legal topics,
such as Administrative Law. Appellate
Practice. Family Law. Legal Research
Legal Writing, Trial Practice, Civil Law.
Rules ofCourt. etc. To obtain more i",o
and prices for available publications in
the CLE series contact: LexisNexls,
Attn:
Order Fulfillment,
1275
Broadway. Albany. NY 12204 (ph# 800/
562-1197). Ask for Flo. Bar CLE
Publication catalog.

"Post Conviction Relief for the Florida
Prisoner"
A collection in book form of Tampa
attorney Loren Rhoten's Postconviction
Corner articles based on professional
experience, to relevant rules of
procedure. Price $20. To order send
money order. cashier's or inmate bank
check to Loren Rhoten, Attorney
(address listed in "FLORIDA Attorneys"
section above) or order online at
www.rhotonpostconviction.com .

"2001
Manual"

Aleph Institute
9540 Collins Ave.

Surfside,·FL 33154
305/ 864-5553
www,aleoh-institpfe,om
admin@alqlb-institute.org
Services:
Provides Jewish religious
education,
counseling,
emergency
aSsistance and referrals to Jewish
prisoners and theirfamilies.

Time for Freedom
Pastor Bernie DeCastro
PO Box 819
Ocala, FL 34470
· 3521351-1280
Email: tff@gate.net
Services: Provides parent education;
self-help support; ;"'0; referrals;
mentoring; religious ministry; adl10cacy
for male prisoners. ex-prisoners and
theirfamilies.

Kairos Outside
140 N. Orange Ave., #180
Wmter Park, FL 32789

407/629-4948
'
www,kiarosprisonministrv.org
kajmsjo@aoI.cqm
Services: Provides mentoring, religious .
ministry. family reuntjication support
and weelcend retreats for female adults
with Incarcerated loved ones.

Government-in-the-Sunshine

Manual covering Florida Sunshine Laws
(open public meetings and records laws)
published by The First Amendment
Foundation. Price $15.95 check or
mOM)! order to: Fint Amendment
Foundation, 336 E. College Ave., Ste
101. Tallahassee. FL 32~01. Credit card
orders call 850/224-4555 or order
online at www.floridafaf.org . Add 7.5%
state sales tta to $15.95 payment.
FLORIDA
Other Groups I Organizations

Citizens United for Alternatives to the
DeathPena!ty
177 N. US Hwy I, Ste. B-297
Tequesta, FL 33469

Prison Connection, Inc.
1859 Polo Lake Dr. East
· Wellington, FL 33414
888/218-8464
www,theprisonconnectioD.CQm
seeacon@ao1.com
· Services.' Provides bus transportation
and meals to prison vlslton. Auo
provides giftsforprisoners' children.

NATIONAL
Newsletters/Journals

California Prison Focus
2940 1(/J Street, Ste. B5
San Francisco, CA 94103
www.prisons.org

Services:
Grassroots organizing of .
. people opposed to death penalty,
Quarterly new3 Journal rep0rt8 011
Wueslconditions in. CA SHU prisons.

21

Florida Prison Legal Penpectives
Some national i,go. PrLroners $4
yr., all othen $20; Sample copy $1.

pet'

Prison Book Projea
P.O. Box 1146
Sharpes. FL 32959
.

Subterran~

Donations/stamps appreciated to help
with publishing/mailing.
FAMMGram
1612 K. St., NW, Ste. 1400
Washington, DC 20006
www.famm·org

Prison Books

Monthly journal carries summaries and
analysts bfrecent prisoner righls cases,
seJfhelp litigation articles, prisonrelated news. Prisoners $18 per year,
$25 others. Sample copy $1.
Nolo News
50 Parker St.
Berkeley, CA 94710

Wayward Council Books
Gainesvlll~ Books for Prisoners
P.O. Box 12164
Gainesville, FL 32604

Quartei-Iy news journal focused on fight
against mandatory minimum prison
sentences.
Published by Families
Against Mandatory Minimums - .a
National organization. Prisoners $10
individuals $25,
professionals $50.
Membership-based organization.

Books 4 Prisoners
c/o Groundwork's Books
0323 Student Center
La Jolla, Ca. 92037

Fortune News
53 W. 23 n1 St., 81b Floor
New York, NY 10010.
www.fortunesociety.org

Grant Publications
Alice S. Grant
P.O. Box 28812
Greenfield, WI 53228-0812

Book 'em
P.O. Box 71357
PittSburg, PA 15213

Quarterly magazine of the Fortune
society CQ17')1ing ~~de variety of articles
and info abouf" prisons, prisoners,
criminaljustice. re1uJbililation, etc. Free
to prisoners. ,.:.;-

Sun'Subscriptions
91 S Oesmore Dr.
Winter Park, FL 32972

9 E. Gregory
Pensacola, FL 32501

MEP

Quarterly seJfhelp newsletter covers·
(non-prison) civi/litigation issues. Thoyear subscription $12.
.
DISCOUNT ~AGAZINE SERVICE

P.O. Box 5311 '
Madison, WI 53705

DC Prisoners Book Project
P.O. Box 5206
Hyattsville. MO 20782

Hepatitis C Awareness News
PO Box 41803
Eugene, OR 97404

Bound Together Bookstore
Prison LiteTature Project
1369 Haight St.
San Francisco, CA 941 17

BI-monthly 'newsleuer published by
hepatitis C Prison Coal/tion wit~ news
and Info about Hep C and HlY/HCV.
Fr.ee upon request; but stamp donQlions
needed and welcomed.
~

Upendra Dasa
P.O. Box 91 16
Boise, 1083707·9116
Free
materialS
Consciousness

on

KrLrhna

Liberation Prison Project
P.O. Box 31527
San Francisco, CA 94131
Offen Buddist Materials
Human Kindness Foundation
P.O. Box 61619
Durham, NC27715
Free Interfaith spirilual books and
newsletter.
Coalition for PrisonerS Rights Newsletter
POBox 1911
.
Santa Fe, NM 87504-1911 '

Justice Denied Magazine
PO Box 68911
.
Coquille, OR 98168

Magazine dedicated to exposing
wrongfUl conviction cases. Prlsonen
$10 per 6 issues, $20for others
Justice Matters
PO Box 40085
Portland, OR 97,240-0085 .

. Quarterly newsleuer published by the
Western Prison' Project. Prisoners $7
pet' year, $15 all others. Good resource
info..

NATIONAL
Book ProjectS

The fo\lowing sources provide free
books to prisoners. However, these
projects rely on volunteers and donations
to operate. Whenever possible, prisoners
should help these projects when
requesting free books by sending a few
stamps for postage.
Requests for
specific books can mly be honored,
instead, request books by type, e.g.
mystery, legal,. historical, novel, etc.
Requests are usually limited to 2 or 3
books at a time..
Books Through Bars
4722 Baltimore Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19143-3503

Prison Book Program
clo Lucy Parsons Ctr. & Bookstore

1306 Hancock St., 8te 100
Quincy, MA 02169
Prison Legal News
2400 NW 80111 St. #148
Seattle, WA 98117

Prison Book Project

Web site: www.prisonlegalnews.org

PO Box 396
Amherst, MA 01004·0396

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives

NATIONAL
Resoun:e Lists

AL, A~

"ACLU Prisoner Assistance Directory"
(Florldtz prisoners see Yolume " of
"Pruoners and the L/rw" in major
llutitldion.f' law Ilbrary- contailu above
dlrectOl'y.)

"bsource Directory for Prisoners"
Naijor Prison Dharma Service
PO Box 7417
Boulder. CO 80304

www.Da1jOI.com

(D1rectmy can be printed off website for
free.)

"NatloDBI Prisoner Resource List"
avalJablefreefrom:

Prison Book Program
1306 Hancock St, Ste 100
Quincy. MA 02169

CA.

co.

Flo GA, llo U. OK.

OR. MI, MS, NC. NY, TX WI or
rrallonwide. Specify state with request.

'

"Resource and Organizing Guide"
avallablefrom: ','
Prison Activist Resource Center
P080x339 '
Berkeley. CA 94701
(Donation/stamps requested to help
oJliet printing/mailing costs.)

"DirectorY ofPrograms Serving Families
ofAdult Offenders"
available free from:
NatioDaJ Institute ofConectionS

Information Center
1860 Industrial Circle, Ste. A
Longmont, CO ao50 1
NATIONAL
GroupsIOrganlzations
The Sentencing Project
918 F. St., NW. Ste. 501
Washington, DC 20004
2021628-0871
Services: Provides technical assutance
. to develop altemOtive sentencing
programs and conducts research on
criminal Justice issues.
No direct
1e1vlces to pruonen.

'StopPrisonCI Rape
3325 WiiShirO Blvd.. Ste. 340
Lcls Angeles, CA 90010
!'n·S·om

Center for Constitutional Rights
666 Broadway
New York, NY 1~12
www.jailhouselaw.org

Amnesty International, USA

322 Eighth Ave.
New York, NY 10001
www·amnelllY.org

CCR is one of the organizations thpJ
cooperates to produce the "Jal/lwt.l&e
Lawyer's Manual. .. Copies of the
manual are provided to prisoners at no
charge. The JLM can also ,be
downloaded and printed from the above
website at no cost.

AI is" 'an Independent. International
. organization that worb to protect
hwrtan righa.

CURE
(Citizens
United
Rehabilitation ofErrants)
National capitol Station
PO Box 3210
Washin~n,DC 20013
2021789-2126
ww'w.curenational.om ,:'
"

,

Services: Professional typing services
bjI' maiL" " Cowipuler. typewriter,
transcription, . black/color ""wing tind
,photocopying. Free price list upon
request. Special rates for prisoners.

SPR workt to end sexual violSlWB
against prisoners. COU1Ueling resource
guides for pruoners and released rape
victims and advocates are available for:

for

Grant Publications
Alice S. Grant
P.O. Box 28812
Greenfield, WI 53228-0812

~l.l-.' ';'.

. Services: Organf:i~Prlsoners and their
families to work. for criminal justice
refonn. Many state chopten.

Diseotml magazine subscription service
for prisoners. Send SASEfor price list.

Sun Subscriptions
915 Densmore Dr.
Winter Park, FL 32792

Vietnam Veterans ofAmerica
860S Cameron St.. Ste 400
Silver Spring. MD 20910

www·vva.om

Ducount magazine subscription service.
Wrltefor p,rice lut.

Publishes "FromFelon to Freedom" a
pre-release guide for imprisoned
velerans. Write for more info.

Salvation Army
P.O. Box 269
Alexandria, VA 22313
Has

. '

[When contacting the above dlseotml
magazine services, please lei them know
that )IOU learned about them In Florida
Prison Legal Perspectives.]
INTERNET RESOURCES

f

parole/probation programs In
alm~t every major CIty. Wrltefor Info.

Correct HELP
P.O. Box 46267
West Hollywood, CA 90046
HIV Hotline 323/822-3838

Infonnation on the Internet is available
to prisoners with fiunily or friends on the
outside with online access who will print
and mail materi81 in. The amount of info
on the 'Net' is tremendous. Info on
almost any subject can be found online.
The following lists some websites that
may be useful for info.

Provides info related 10 HIY. Contact if
you can't access programs or are not
receiving proper medications.

LegallLeg1slative

General

NATIONAL
Services

Let My Fingers Do Your Typing
PO Box4178·FPLP
Winter Park. FL 32793-4178

wwwJawgawletcom
Searches government and other sites for
law.,

Florida Prison Legal Penpeetives
www.nolo.com
Provides' some general legal info and
sells boob on wide variety of legal
topics useful to the public.

www.f1courts.org

.

www.findlaw.com

www.FCLA.edu

Good site for searching out federal and
state law.

Florida Stale University law Ubi-ary
website,

Provides directory and links to Florida
courts' websites.

www.washlaw.edu
www.law.miami.edullibnyy

Legal search enginefor locating primary
legal sources 'at the federal and state
levels.

University ofMiami law library website.

www.law,ufl.edu
www.prisonactivists.org
Provides wide variety of prison-related
info. Includes large "tink" section to
many other related legal and nonlegal
websites. '

University
website.

of Florida

law

library

www,stetson.eduldepartmentsl1ibrarylla
.~

Stetson University law library website. ,

www.martindale.com
Posts the "GoVernment In the Sunshine
Manual" (public meetings and public
records manual).

Federal

www.flabar.orglnewflabarlmemberservic'
. es/CLE
.

www.thomas.loc.gov

Sells continuing Legal Education series
oflegal books concerning Fla. law.

Sourcefor federal legislative material.

www.uscourts.gov
Links and information about
Supreme and otherfederal courts.

Florida
Supreme
www.flcoultS.org·

U.S.

www.call.uscourts.gov
Circuit

County Clerks or Court:
Alachua:www.clerkalachuafl,omtclerkli
.ndex.html
Baker. http;llbakercountyfl.omtcledc
Bay: www.baycoclerk.com
Bradford: www.bradfordclerk.com
Brevard: www.clerk.co.brevard.Q.us
Broward: www.browardclmc,grg
Calhoun: www.calhounclerk.com .:
Charlotte:wwW.co.charlotte.t1.usICjrkigfo
lelrek default.htm
Citrus: www.clerk.cjtrus.fl.us
Clay: htt}!;I!clerlc.co,clay.fl.Us
Collier. www.clerk.co!lier.f1.us
Columbia: www.columbiac!erk.com
Dade

www.legal.fim,edu

Provides info on lawyers nationwide,
including contact info, area 'of practice,
how long, etc.

Eleventh
website.

17111 Circuit: www.17th.flcourts.gm .
18th Circuit: www.judI8.f)courts,org
19lb Circuit: www,circuitl9.om
20dl Circuit: www.ca.eiis20.org

Court

District Courts or Appeal:
First DCA: www.ldca.org
Second DCA: www,2dca.grg
Third DCA: www,3dca.flcourts.org
Fourth DCA: www.4dca,org
Fifth DCA: www.Sdca.org

of Appeal

www.f1nd.uscourts.gov
U.S. District Court. Northern District of
Florida website.

www.flmd.uscourts.gov
U.S. ,pistrict Court, Middle District of
Florida website.

www.flsd.uscourts.goy
U.S. District Court. Southern District of
Florida website.'

www.myflorida.com
Links to state agency and government
offices' websites.

Www.flsenate.gov
www.myfloridahouse,gov
Florida Legislature's websites. Provides
directory of stale legislalors; complete
Florida statutes (laws); Senate and
HaUse bill!~. bill histories and analyses.

Court:

~

CircuIt Courts:
lit Circuit: www.firstjudjcjalcircuilorg
2nd Circuit: www.2ndcircpjt.!eon.fl.us
3nl Circuit: www,judJ.flcourts.org
4thCircuit:www.coj.netJDepartmentsIFou
rth+Judicial+Circuit+Courtldefaulthtm
SIhCircuit
'
hfffiudS.flcourts.org/courtslindex.htm
6 Circuit: www.jud6.org
.
7lh Circuit: www.cjrcpit7.grg
8th Circuit www.circuitltorg
9lb Circuit: www.ninja9.org
10lb Circuit: www.judIO.org
11 th Circuit: http://iudll.flcourts.org
12th Circuit: httpjIll2circujLstate.fl.us
)3111 Circuit: http://iudI3,flcourts.grg
.
14lb Circuit: for infonnation cal! 8S0747-5327
.
lS1llCircuit:www.co.palmbeacb.f).uslcad
min
l6ii Circuit: www,jtldI6,OeotJrtitorg

:www.miamidadeclerk.comldadecoc
Desoto: www.desotoclerk.c9m
Dixie: www.dixieclerk.com
Duval: www.duval.fl.us.landata.com
Escambia: www.clerk.co.eSCllJDbia.tl.ua
Flagler. www.mYflaglercounty.com
Franklin: WW\'I.frankUnclerk,coni
Gadsden: www.clerk.co.gadsden.tl.ua
Gilchrist: www.gilchristelerk.cgm
Glades: www.gladesclerk.com .
Gulf. www;gulfclerk,com
Hamilton: www.myhamiltoncgupty,om
Hardee: www.hardeeclerk.com
Hendry: www.hendlyclerk.om
Hernando: www.clerk.Co.hemando.f1.us
Highlands:www.clerk.co.hjghlanda.tl.usl
index neW.html .
Hillsborough: www,hisclerfc.cgm
Holmes: www.holmesClerlc.com
Indian River: www.clerk.indjanriyer.om
Jackson: www.jacksonclerk.com
Jefferson: www.jeffersonclerk,cgm
Lafayette: www;)afavetteclqk,com
Lake: www.clerk.lake.fl.us
Lee: www.leeclerk,om
Leon: www.clerlC.leon.fl.us
Levy: www.leyyclerk,cgm .
Liberty: www.libe.rtvclerk.com
Madison: www.madisonclerk.com
Manat~: www.manateeelerk,CQpt
Marion: www.marionCQuntyclerk,Qrg
Martin:httpj/lclerkweb,martin,fl,uslClqk
Web
Monroe: www.monroe.fl.us.landala.com
Nassau:www.nassauclerlc.comlclerklc1er
k main.htm
Okaloosa: www.clerkofcourts.cc
Okeechobee:www,clerk.co.okeechobee,f
l.J!!
.

Orange: http://orangeclerlc.onetggv.net
Osceola: www.osceolaclerk.com

"

Florida Priso~ Leg.1 Penpectives
PaIm Beach: www.pbcountyclerk.com
Pasco: www.pascoclerk.com·
Pinellas: www.pinel1asclerk.org
Polk: www.polkcountyclerk.net
Putnam: www.putnam-fl.comlclk .
St. Johns: www.co.st-johns.fl.uslConstOfficmlClerk-of-Courtlindex,htm
81. Lucie: www.slcclerkofcourt.com
Santa Rosa: www.santarosaclerk.com
Sarasota: www.sarasotaclerk.com
Seminole: www.seminoleclerk,org
8umter:bttp:llhome·earthlink,net/%7Esu
mten;cq

.

Suwannee: www,suwclerk,org
Taylor: www.bwlorc1erk.com
Union: www.unionclerk.com ,
Volusia: www.clerk.orglindex.html
Wakulla: www.wakullaclerk.com
Walton: www.co.walton.f1.uslclerk
Wasbington: www,washingtonclerk.cqm
FPLP intends to update this list on a
continuing basis as a service to readers.
Please let us knOw. if you are aware of,
other resources ,that prisoners, their
fiunilies or advocates maybe interested
in at the below address or by email:
FPLP
Attn: Resource List

Advertise in FPLP

AJ)VEHTISING NOTICE
Oul

Reach new clients ,or customerS through advertisirig in

Florida Prison Legal PersP9.cfives. "To obtain advertising and
rate information write or email
us at: ...

FPLP
Attn: Advertising
'15232 E. Colonial Dr, .
Orlando, FL 32826-5134
Or:
fplp@aol.com

of

rOnrLTIl for our
the FI'LI' staff tr'il:S
to ensun: that thl: ad\'l~I,tiscrs
in 1"1'1.1' are rCfllltahk and
qnalified to provide tIll: Sl:rvires heing ofh:n:d. UmYCVCI',
"T Clllnot IIIl'ct l'Yer~' :\llvertiSl'r so II1clI1l.1l:rs/re:llh:I'S an'
advisl,t1 \() always pcrsllually
l:ont:lrt advertisers for fllrtlll:r
illfonllatiull ahuut thl'ir qualificatiolls or sl'rvices b efo 1'(' lIIakill;': a dl'l:isioll to hire them or
pIII'(:hasl~ a sen'icc or prOlluc\.
You shuuhl 1Il'\'l:r selld kgal or
other doculllelltS 10 all advertisel" Ill'fol'e cOlllartillg tlwlII
a III I n'celvllIg din'rtiCills to
sellll such material.
n\l~mIH'rs,

PO Box 660-387

Chuluota, FL )2766
fplp@aol.com

•

National Social Rehabilitation and Re-Entry Program is a
new innovative program for inmates and ex-offenders. The·
program provides training for ex-offenders and inmates
'
seeking entry level employment with social seivices agencies,
community groups, prison ministries and corporate volunteer
programs. Job guidance and career referral Is prOVided. This
program is a ministry f~nded and supported by the SJM
Family Foundation. Please visit our website for more
information. http:/twww.prisonerresources.coml

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
Florida Department of Corrections

Organization Chart
General Counsel
Rosa carson

SECRETARY
JamesR.
McDonough

-

.

I---

Inspector General
Paul C. Dedl:er

I

Deputy Secretary of

Chief ofStaff

Corrections

RIchard Prucfom

-LauraE.

Bedard. Ph.D.

. Inmate Grievances

Grants<vacant>

-f-

poncy Development

.

I-

celeste Kemp

-

DavId PrIdGen

DeputyAssistant
Secretary
-Programs-

f--

IV· Marta Wlacorta

HaUle Coombs

I
Director of
Health Services

HJeteenthIa
'TIna- Hayes

f---

CurtJswpo

Maureen Olson

Robert Woody

<vacant>

AssIstant secretary
of Community
Corrections

PatrfckH.

Deputy Director of
Health Services
Admlnlstratfon

Research &
_Data AnalYsis

Deputy Director of
Administration

Brown., M.D.

RecruftmertV
Training

Community
Relations
I-

M/JDeseay

I

Regional Director
of Institutions '4'
"·Ma~Redd

Robby Q.lnnlngham

Director of
Department
Initiatives

DavId Ensley

III· Gerald Abd~asJ

DJrectorof
GovernmentalAffaIrs

Ralph K1essJg

Franchatta Barber

I· Wendel Whitehurst

Director of
Administration

<vacant>

I

Deputy Assistant
SeCretary
.()peratfons-

Director of
Communications

Deputy Director of
Administration

Assistant Secretary
of Institutions
GeorgeSapp

•

Chief Information
OffIcer

TrJsha Recfd

.

•

I-

-

Deputy Director of
Health Services
Daniel P. Cheny, III

<vacant>

-

Deputy Assistant
secretary
-OperationsJennyMmer

Deputy Assistant

-

Secreta'1

-Prog~~
Pam Denn1aitc

Regional Director
of Community
Corrections ,4J
"--

,.Tony Halper
". BarbaraSQlll

1/1. CJlIf Rowan
IV· Beth AtchJson

..

Florida Prison Legal Penpeetives
.'

i

.1fI

BUdg~t
.DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
BUDGET SUMMARY
(FY200~6J
.~.

operating Funds
Expenditures by Budget Entity:
Department_Administra~on.....•...........•.. ~

~

$

58,510,056

$

1,351,434,076

$

340,867,844

Community. Corrections

~ ..................•..................•...........•...........•...........•...........•.... $

251,003,879

Information Tech.nology

~............•.....................•.•...........•...........•............................ $

18.555,594

~

Security and Institutional Operations

,
~

Health Services................•...................................;........•..••...:..........•..,....••...:

l)!jo"\'~

.

. Programs

'.~

1"ff:tfrI:'tt,.•.•••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

t •••••••••••••••••••••••••.

~otal Operating Fu~ds

~

:

;~:{~."

:

$

44,166,212

;.. $ 2,064.537,661

Fixed Capital Outlay Funds
To P~ovide Additional Capacity

~

To Maintain Existing FacUities

Total Fixed Capital Outlay Funds :

~

:

$

71,973,152

$

2,992,208

$

74,965,360'

,..•...........•...... ~ .....• $ 2,139,503,021

Total

Local Funds
Collection Activities:

Cost of Supervision Fees......................•..........

t •••••

~

$

26,845,517

$

57,940,199

$

20,912,359

~ •... $

94,664,986

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .-• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Restitution, Fines, and Court Costs
Subsistence, Transportation, and other ~ourt~OrderedPayments ~

;.:

Inmate Banking A~vities:
j

Total Deposits

Total Disbursements........•...•........................................•..............•................••........... ~ .••.•..•. $ .

94,257,347

June 30, 2006 Total Assets ...........................................•................. ~ .....•...........•....•..•.•.•...... $

10,563,661

,

.

Other Activity:
Revenue f~om Canteen Operations
Inmate Telephone Commissions

,'

: :
,~

$

23.609,862

$

15,272,896

Flor~da.

Prison Legal Penpeetives

Florida Department of Corrections

Inmate Programs
Inmate Workforce Development Programs Offered Statewide
__.!acJlJty/ ## of Programs
Apalachee CI - East (3)

Av~~-p-;;kCt (6)

.. - .. ------

Workforce Development Education Programs
(I) Auto Collision Repair & Refinishing. (2) Cabinetmaking. (3) Welding Technology.

I

I~~ _.."--.-_
:~~fn~~~;hY~~~:~5)~~E~~~;;~~!;:::~~f&~ ~~~!tSf:~·~~cl:~~i~gy.
.--.--..
- _- . ._. ----.- ----- --'--.------- - .-.._ -.

~··l·-·-

CI (4)
i (I) Cabinetmaking.
(2) Electricity. (3) Masonry. (4) Plumbing Technology.
.Baker
. -.---.-----r=:-.....----....-----.- ....-..
.._ ... -

BteYard CI (5)
• (I) Autotronics/Automotive Service Technology. (2) Carpentry. (3) Electronics Technology.
__
._.._.J...<.4)~~!onry·lSl~~!ngTechno~~&!.:
..__.•_.
__.....••_ _
. _ . _••.
.__ ..
Br~.~~~_ ~I· (3) _.__ .-l!.~~~~lDmercia!~rtTechnology, (2) Fashion Design & p~.~~.ction. (3) PC Support Se1'!lces. ~ . _...

~oun CI (I)

.

I

1

(I) Printing/Graphic ArtslWEB Design Services.

-~:;~i;y~I(;~) .• --~ !~:~~=:~:~~~:i;;I~~:Z~~:~~g;(2j·C~bln~~making. (3) Plumbing Technolo~:---- ... -~~-'~'-'=-

'D~f()-A-;nex (3)-·-· -_.. - :. ~;~~~::t(:;~:~~~~:Z~i174!:~:;uter Progra~~lng & Te~nology.

I.

I

H

.. _+!!!-~_a.!o.nry.
.
....__ .__-:-_ .._.-:-.._ ..... _.
I1 (I) Computer
Electronics
Technology.
(2) PC Support
•.._· _ _•__ ··,_··_··,··,_·0-4_._ ,
----.-..•.
-,_.,.. Services.

FrankJlnCI(I)
Glades
CI (2)
.• -_._-_........

•.

------~_

..

.

..
.

_l!amUto~~i~ex(~L--.J9_~~puterEle~~~'.'.i~~!~h'!.ol~&!.~~l~~ ~~pportS~ices:-_.__ .•..._.
Hardee CI (1)
.. . .

!(I) Carpentry.

.

- .- .. - ' - - - ' - " ' 1 - -

~!"1lndoCI •

.!!L

. ....__._--... ... ..-. - - ..-. -

.. _ .

~-__._-----~

: (1) Cablne~maltlng. (2) Electricity, (3) MaSonry.

HamUton CI (3)

__

.. _.

.__.

....- .."-' - - - . - - . -. - ..

~ (I) D~,:::..gl_ta_lD--,-~-=sn,--.

_ . _ ••

...

l._.

•

.• __ .

+

._.

_

••

r ••• _ .

......

__ •

__

._

_ _ ..

~

.
_
Hillsborough CI • (2)
: (I) Carpentry. (2) Commercial Foods & Culinary Arts.
Holmes ci (3)
, (I) Auto Collision Repair & Refinishing. (2) PC Support Services, (3) Welding Technology.
. H~~est;~d CI· (3)
_... :"(1) A~t~t;~i~.(2)-A~t~~~ii;eServlc~T~h~~I~8Y; (3) PC-S~p~-':;S~~i~~;'----' .._.-.--.i~db~'Ri;erCI (3-)-_.
I (I) Envl;~~-;;talServi~(2)M;;~~;y,(3)PCS~;~rtS;~i~;'~--._--. --- .... - ..•..
•

••• _.

__ •

•

Lake (~) '.~:~~=-~='.
~b.i~!~~a.~i~:(2) G~E~gin-; S;~~;T;~h~~i~g;; ~~i_;:~~~/~~i~~ T~~~e~t.Te~h.~~!o~les.
Lancaster CI (6)
! (I) Autotronics/Automotive Service Technology, (2) Carpentry. (3) Commercial Foods & Culinary Arts. (4)
Environmental Services. (5) Small Gas Engine Service. (6) Printing/Graphic Arts.
.
Lawt~Ci'(I)-'-'-'----- rCI) Drafti~gA~itecturai.
.
..... _. _.... -. .... .... ... . . .

Lil)

ci .

-f--'- .._ ... _. -

(3)

... -

.

Lowell C~· .(31 ••. ••
; ~)~~.~~~~~. (2r~~fting ~~I!~ct~~.I.(~J. ~~.S~y.f~r.t.~.~r.':~~~:
... __._._ ...
._.. _
Lowell CI ~~!1~.~ _~~.. .. j (I) F~~I~n_~!si~n & ~rodu~~i?n.
. _. ... .
Lowell CI Forest Hills • (2)' . (I) ~~~!.~~~e Technology; (~) Sm.all Gas ~nglne ~rvlce.
Marion CI (5)
~ (1) Cabinetmaking. (2) Drafting Mechanical. (3) Electricity. (4) PC Support Services. (5) WaterlWastewater
_______
!_~r~a!.~!'.'.~!.e~~~!~~!!~.:._ __
__._.•.. _..... .
.._
_. _
.
Marlon.CI Wor~_~~~~!. .i .(1). E!iu.I~~. ~~e Tec~llol~gy.
.
. .
..
.••..
New River CI - East (4)
~ (1) Consumer Electronic Repair. (2) PC Support Services. (3) Plumbing Technology.
. _
_.._
.~. (4~.~r~~i~~Graphlc.A~~. . .
_.
._.__.
~~w.~j!!~_~1• We'! (2)._._d.!.>_~mllll~_8!_~~JlneS~~!(~.~~I~i~.~ !~~~~~I~~!.
._.
._....
.
Polk CI (4)
. (I) Auto SerVice Technology, (2) Computer Electronics Technology. (3) Consumer Electronic Repair. (4)
. ._. __ ..__.•
~!~~mbln~_T.!~.n~lo~._..
. ._ .. _
. ._
_
_
Sumter CI (4)
. (I) Automotive Service Technology. (2) Draft1ng Architectural. (3) Electronics Technology•
(4) Masonry._~
.
.__ .. _._._
_.
............•..__.• _ ._._
. •....•...
. T.~!!~_CI Annex (2)
.
I (ltMas~nry. (2) PCSup.~ort.~~rv~~~~ __ ...__ ._._._... _. __ .. _.__ .__.•• __ .._ .
Tomoka CI (2)
i (I) Diversified Career Technology/Blind Services. (2) Wheelchair Repair.
'
'Wabi';cI(I)

• Denotes female facility

._.•

_-! (I)E~~i~;;;;;;)s~~;;.-··---··

._

---.- '---"'-"-'

.

_ _. _ ;

I

.-I

I

II
I

I

Florida.Prison Legal Perspectives

·,
1rI
.,

,:.l..

.

.

Florida Department.of Corrections

Inmate Population on June 30, 2006
Inmate Population on June 30, 2002 - 2006
100,000
90,000

88.576

84.901

81.974

80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000

o L.L.~2~0~02~...L-IL..L---=2"='0"='03=-.L-I--L.-==-=-~.l-.L--L.--=:::-=::--L-l..--L.."",,::,,:~-.l.....J

I!I Male

~ Female

Florida prison populationjumps 4,30/0 since last fiscal year
Inmate population refersto the 88,576 inmates who
were present in the Florida prison system on June 30,
2006. The following tables and charts will detail the
characteristics of these inmates. Oth~r fiscal years are
also featured to illustrate trends.
• The number of inmates in prison rose 20.4% over
the last 5 years from 73,553 in June 2002 to 88,576
in June 2006. There was a 4.3% increase since last
fiscal year.
• The majority of inmates in prison on June 30,
2006 are male (82,360 or 93.0%) and black (44,674
or 50.4%). However, the percentage of black inmates in prison is, decreasing (53.3% i.n June 2002
to 50.4% in June 2006).
'
• The top five categories of primary offenses
for which inmates are incarcerated are: drugs
(20.2%), burglary (14.5%), murder/manslaughter

(12.8%), violent personal offenses such as carjacking and aggravated assault (12.3%), and robbery
(12.0%).

• On June 30, 2006. 481 of every 100,000 Floridians
were incarcerated compared to 440 in 2002.

Inmates Incarcerated on June 30
(Per '00,000 Florida Population)
468

500

475

481

400
300
200
100

ol.--------------__

---IIL...-_--IL..

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

ji

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives

._

~
:

~.,

.

...... '" .

...... .

..

~~."

~

.•...:

..~

Florida Department of Corrections

Inmate Population on June 30,' 2006
Prior Commitments to the' Florida Department of Corrections
(Inmate Population on June 30, 2006J

46.9%

of inmates in prison on June 30, 2006· had been in Florida prison before

Prior'commitment refers to any previous occasion that
an inmate served time in the Flo~ida prison system.
This does riot include supervision, such as probation.
Nor does it include inmates who may have been in
county jails in Florida, in other state systems or in the
Federal prison system.
• The percentage of inmates in prison on June 30
who had been in Florida prisons previously has
decreased slightly over five years from 47.6% in
2002 to 46.9% in 2006.
• The percentage of inmates in prison with a prior
commitment (46.9%) is slightly less than last year
(47.0%).
• Of the 47,020 (53.1 %) inmates in prison on June
30,2006 who had no prior Florida prison commitments, 54.5% were white, 40:9% were black
and 4.6% were other races.
• Of all inmates, 20.4% had been in prison in
Florida once before, 11.1% had been in twice before, and 15.4% had been in three or more times
before;

Percent of Inmate Population with Prior
Commitments to Flprida's Prison System on
June 30, 2002-2006
.
49.0%
48.6%
48.2gb
47.8%

47.6%

47.4Qb

47.2%

47.0%
46.6%
46.2%

45.8;b
45.4%
45.0% I..-J._.....I-_l--.....J._..J....-_l--...J.._..J....-.....J._.....l-

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Florida Prison Legal Perspectives
Florida Prisoners' Legal Aid Organization Inc.

BECOME A MEMBER""

I

YES ! I wish to become a member ofFlorida
Prisoners' Legal Aid Organiution. Inc.
3. Your Name ad Address (PLEASE PRINT)

1. Please Check ./ One:

______________DC#

CJ Membership Renewal

_

Name
(] New Membership
AgencylLibrarylInstitution IOryj
2. Select ./ Category

Address

CJ $)5 Family/AdvocatelIndividual
CJ $1() Prisoner

City

State

Zip

CJ $30 AttorneysIProfessionals

Email Address and lor Phone Number

(] $60 Gov't AgenciesILibrariesiOrgsJete.

C1I" Please make all checks or money orders payable to Florida Prisoners' Legal Aid Org., Inc. Please complete the above form and send it along with

the indicated membership dues to: FPLAO. Inc., P.O. Box 1511, Christmas FL 32709-1511. For family members or loved ones of Florida prisoners
who are unable to afford the basic membership dues, any contribution is acceptable for membership. Memberships run one year. If you would like to
make a donation to FPLAO. Inc., to help the organization continue its work for prisoners and their families. send donations in any amount 10 the
same ijddress. Thank You. All members receive Florida Prison Legal Penpectives.

EXPERIENCEDCRJMINAL DEFENSE ATToRNEy
"AVAILABLE FOR STATE AND. FEDERAL
POST-CONVICTION" MAT'I'ERS'"

~

:Admiued to the Florida-Bar in 1973 "
.:, Over thirty YealsexperienCe"~ the practiC¢'ofC!imiDalla~
eProviding rep~ntatiO(l~·Pirect"Ap~"~ApP'&1s;

3.8501llOtions, 3.800· motions. 2255 DiotiODSt:StatealiClFederai
"".iiabeIIs CorPus ~etidons, Detainer IsSues,
"~ other PosteonvietiOD Matters. "
Inquiries to:
"Law offtces of
'Danie{'D."~azdr "

2J53j;ee.~

'Winter 1'ari, :If. 32789
'1'otrfree 'ie~ J~8'~45-5351l
,'1'ea.f4(7) 645-53$2'
:Fax: '(4"7)'645-3224'
1M biclq 01 • lawyelt 15
JOa a¢.~, ut aa' to ••nd

an" UlpDrtaDt dec18i~

)'0\1 fr.~

tbat .Iiould nOt be baUd ~.lr. upoD adveRt• .-au.
lDfomaUOIl abOUt" ~ qaallflcatlou ad ~d.l!C'8.
""

"..fon

31

PRISON LEGAL NEWS

I.

SUBMISSION OF MATERIAL TO

FPLP

Because of the large volume of mail being
received. financial considerations, and the
inability to provi~c individual
assistance.
members should not send copies of legal
documents of pending or potential cases to
FPLP without having first contacted the staff
and receiving directions to send same. Neith~r
FPLP. nor its staff. arc responsible for any
unsolicited rnatuiaJ sent.

.

Members arc requested to continue sending
news information, newspaper clippings (please
include name of papa and date).
memorandums. photocopies of final decisions
in unpubliShed c:ases. and potential articles for
publication. Please send only copies of such
material that do not have to be returned. FPLP
depends on YOU. its readers and members to
keep infonncd. Thank you for your
cooperation and participation in helping to get
the news out. Your efforts are greatly
appreciated.

48·,.

Pristm Legrzl Netn is a
cnombty mapzinc
wtUch has been published siDce 1990. Each issue is
~ wfIb summaries Illd ~ otrcecat court
dcdIkm fiom manid &he couatry dcatiq with
prisoner risIdI and Mittc:D &om II prisoner
perspective. 11Ic mapziftc crftm cmia artidcs
from ~ giviag how-to UtipIioa advice. Also
inchIdcd in each im= arc news adcIcs daftftg with
prison-cdmcd IIftI88Ie aad adiYiAn. fium Cbc
end IRJUDd die wartd.
AMuaI subsalpticoe rata·~ SIS for prisonen.
lfyGu can"t afford SI8 at cmce. scaclatlcasl S91ftd
PLN wiD pRII'Ife 1m Issua at SI.!O ceda Cor a sis

u.s.

maaIb ~. New IIld umad postage.
awdopa may lie used 01

samps or cmbotsed

P.O. Box 1511

Name

Far ~ iDdMcbIk. the year
adbalptioa n:e is $25. (nstitntioaal ClC' (JIof'caiuoat
(~
li!nries. pemmea IgaICia.
orpnizaticllll) subsaiptioa nus ere S60 a~. A

Address

sukcribc to PLN coaIIId:
.
Prisoa Lcpt ~

City

urapIc copy of PLN is aYaflabfc rat $1. To
2«10 NW" ST. '148
5atdc. WA 98117
(206)246.1022
MIp:~.~IftM'/l

Christmas. FL 32709-1511

NEW ADDRESS (pLEASE PRINT CLEARLV)

paymad.

tOnka 8ClCCptIdliy pfMIac or aifmct

Florida Prison Legal
Perspectives

If so. please complete the below infonnation and mail it to FPLP so
that the mailing list can be ~updated:

lost.

- State
1"="1

~MaU

P.O. Box 1511

to: FPLP, Christmas, FL 32709-151'1

VOLUME 13 ISSUE 1

JANIFEB 2007

NON-PROFIT
U.s.POSTAGE
PAID
MtD.FL.FL
PERMIT 85065