Case Name: Marzuq AL-HAKIM, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2001-03-16
Citations: 783 So. 2d 293
Docket Number: No. 5D01-369
Parties: Marzuq AL-HAKIM, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Judges: PALMER, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 783
Pages: 293–295

Head Matter:
Marzuq AL-HAKIM, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
No. 5D01-369.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
March 16, 2001.
Marzuq Al-Hakim, Crawfordville, pro se.
No Appearance for Respondent.

Opinion:
PLEUS, J.
Marzuq Al-Hakim, an inmate at the Wa-kulla Correctional Institution, seeks from this court, as best we can discern, a writ of mandamus directed to the sheriff who, Al-Hakim claims, has yet to serve process with regard to a complaint he filed in a civil action.
Al-Hakim is not entitled to a writ of mandamus at this time. Absent from his instant petition is any allegation that he has made an attempt to schedule a court hearing with the trial court in conjunction with his motion. It is well-settled that in a civil proceeding, it is generally necessary to bring a pending matter to the trial court's attention by having it noticed for hearing. See Gosby v. Third Judicial Circuit Court, 562 So.2d 775 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (in civil proceeding, prisoner must allege that hearing was scheduled with trial judge's office), disapproved on other grounds, 586 So.2d 1056 (Fla.1991). Under Gosby, for purposes of seeking a hearing, it is of no moment that the petitioner is presently incarcerated. In the instant case, if in fact the sheriff has acted improperly in not serving process with regard to Al-Hakim's complaint, the trial court would be in the best position to address the matter at a duly-noticed hearing.
Without any allegation or indication that Al-Hakim noticed the matter for hearing, his instant petition is legally insufficient because an individual seeking to compel a public official to act must first make an express and distinct demand for performance before mandamus will be considered. See Florida Pharmacy Ass'n, Inc. v. Strong, 604 So.2d 529 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Though Al-Hakim is presently incarcerated, he would be able to attend a telephonic hearing should the trial court in its discretion decide to hold one. Gosby v. Third Judicial Circuit, 586 So.2d 1056 (Fla.1991) (trial court has discretion to decide whether to hold a telephonic hearing in prisoner's civil case, but may not make prisoner's physical presence a condition precedent to ruling on pending matter).
Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is summarily denied without prejudice to Al-Hakim later seeking mandamus relief if necessary after first scheduling a hearing with the trial court.
PETITION DENIED.
PALMER, J., concurs.
PETERSON, J., concurs specially, with opinion.