Case ID: so2d_388/html/1341-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Adolph COMER, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, Respondent.
    No. WW-82.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    Oct. 10, 1980.
    Adolph Comer, pro se.
    No appearance for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The petitioner, a prisoner within the custody of the Florida Department of Corree-tions, seeks the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that the Florida Parole and Probation Commission has violated legislative directives in its establishment of certain rules.

While the petitioner claims a jurisdictional base in Chapter 120, Florida Statutes (1979), we find no showing of exhaustion of administrative remedies here. Petitioner is entitled to seek § 120.54(5), F.S., or § 120.-56, F.S., proceedings, which may resolve the issues without resorting to premature judicial intervention. Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed without prejudice to seek review pursuant to § 120.68, F.S., of any final orders of the Parole and Probation Commission resulting from Chapter 120 proceedings.

WENTWORTH and JOANOS, JJ., and WOODIE A. LILES (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur. 
      
      . Petitioner asserts that Rule 23-19.02(2)(g), Fla.Admin.Code, violates legislative intent as expressed in s. 947.165(1), Fla.Stat. (1979), in that the rule may act to impose a longer term to serve than is proper by taking certain factors into account more than once. We do not speak to the merits of this claim.