Case Name: David ARNETT, Appellant, v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-10-12
Citations: 420 So. 2d 377
Docket Number: No. AL-320
Parties: David ARNETT, Appellant, v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, Appellee.
Judges: ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 420
Pages: 377–377

Head Matter:
David ARNETT, Appellant, v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COMMISSION, Appellee.
No. AL-320.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Oct. 12, 1982.
David Arnett, pro se, appellant.
Earl H. Archer, Tallahassee, for appellee.

Opinion:
MILLS, Judge.
Arnett appeals Florida Parole and Probation Commission action establishing his presumptive parole release date. We affirm.
There is no ex post facto violation in applying the matrix in effect at the time of interview when the crime was committed prior to enactment of parole guidelines, Lopez v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 410 So.2d 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Britt v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 417 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Overfield v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 418 So.2d 321 (Fla. 1st DCA, 1982).
The sufficiency of the notice given Arnett before the amendment of the objective parole guidelines is an issue for rule challenge proceedings, Canter v. Florida Parole and Probation Commission, 409 So.2d 227 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.