Case Name: Harrel F. BRADDY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1988-12-21
Citations: 536 So. 2d 1117
Docket Number: No. 88-1063
Parties: Harrel F. BRADDY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 536
Pages: 1117–1117

Head Matter:
Harrel F. BRADDY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 88-1063.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Dec. 21, 1988.
Rehearing and Certification Denied Feb. 8, 1989.
Harrel F. Braddy, Belle Glade, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Cecilia Bradley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Reversed and remanded for an evidentia-ry hearing. The appellant has made a prima facie showing, supported by his own sworn statements, that he was not afforded notice of the disciplinary proceedings conducted against him. The resolution of his claim requires an evidentiary hearing. See Moore v. Wainwright, 366 So.2d 183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
. Of course, these proceedings would be mooted if the appellee decided to afford the appellant a new administrative hearing with proper notice given to appellant.