Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections Book Reviews

Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections by First District Court of Appeal of Florida Book Summary

Petitioner filed a petition for writ of mandamus alleging that respondent refused to credit his sentence with time previously served, as ordered by the sentencing judge. The allegations of the petition, if true, showed that petitioner is presently under illegal constraint. Therefore, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040, the petition was treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus and the state was ordered to show cause why the petition should not be granted. On consideration of the response, we conclude that petitioner's sentence has expired, and we therefore grant the writ. Petitioner was originally sentenced on April 17, 1984, in seven cases. His cumulative sentence totaled 20 years. As a result of a motion to correct sentences, all of the sentences were amended on February 21, 1986, to provide that they run concurrently. The longest sentence was seven years. Each of the amended sentences stated that it was with 1,383 days credit for time served. Petitioner alleged that the Department of Corrections (DOC) refused to apply the 1,383 days to the seven years, and if the credit was applied, petitioner's sentence, including an unrelated consecutive nine month sentence, would have expired.

👋 Do you love Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections books? Please share your friends!

Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections (First District Court of Appeal of Florida) Book Reviews 2024

First District Court of Appeal of Florida - Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections Discussions & Comments

Have you read this book yet? What do you think about Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections by First District Court of Appeal of Florida book? Ask the bookpedia.co community a question about Thomas Duane Diggs v. Department Corrections!