Case Name: Adolph COMER, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, Respondent
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1980-10-10
Citations: 388 So. 2d 1341
Docket Number: No. WW-82
Parties: Adolph COMER, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, Respondent.
Judges: WENTWORTH and JOANOS, JJ., and WOODIE A. LILES (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 388
Pages: 1341–1341

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.