Carson v. Bishop

378 So. 2d 882 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979) · District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District · December 27, 1979 · No. No. MM-375

Summary

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the release of a parolee who had been incarcerated without a parole revocation hearing after arrest on a felony charge. The court held that Florida Statutes sections 949.10 and 949.11 governed the temporary revocation and required a hearing within ten days, creating a specific exception to the general procedure in section 947.23.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Mills, C.J.; Robert P. Smith, Jr., J.; Shivers, J.
Jurisdiction
Florida
Decision date
December 27, 1979
Docket number
No. MM-375
Procedural posture
Appeal from an order granting the appellee's petition for habeas corpus and releasing him from custody.
Standard of review
Not expressly stated; the court reviewed the habeas corpus release order on appeal.
Precedential value
Published Florida District Court of Appeal opinion
Parties
Dale Carson v. Raymond Allan Bishop
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

parolehabeas corpusstatutory interpretationcriminal procedure

Practice areas

ParoleHabeas corpusCriminal procedureStatutory interpretation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether sections 947.22 and 947.23, Florida Statutes (1977), authorized Bishop's continued incarceration and a parole revocation hearing as soon as practicable after arrest despite the ten-day hearing and release requirements in sections 949.10 and 949.11.
  2. Whether the State could rearrest and reincarcerate Bishop under section 947.22 after the ten-day period had expired without a parole revocation hearing.

Holdings

  1. When a parolee is arrested on a subsequent felony charge, sections 949.10 and 949.11 govern the temporary revocation, required hearing, and release procedure, notwithstanding the general language of section 947.23.
  2. The State could not avoid the ten-day hearing and release requirements by releasing and then reincarcerating the parolee under section 947.22 for the same alleged parole violation while preparing to hold a hearing.

Key quotations

Failure of the commission or the court to hold the hearing within 10 days from the date of arrest shall cause the immediate release of such person from incarceration on the temporary revocation. (378 So. 2d at 883)
Such practice cannot be approved in light of the plain language of Sections 949.10 and 949.11. (378 So. 2d at 883)

Factual background

Bishop, a parolee, was arrested in St. Johns County in November 1978 and initially detained for ten days after authorities discovered that he was on parole. He was released on December 1 without parole-violation charges being filed, but was arrested again on December 18 pursuant to a Florida Parole & Probation Commission warrant and incarcerated in Duval County. After his request for bond was denied, he sought habeas corpus relief and was released following a hearing.

Procedural history

Bishop was arrested and detained in connection with an alleged parole violation. After a subsequent arrest on a warrant issued by the Florida Parole & Probation Commission, his request for bond was denied. He petitioned for habeas corpus, and following a hearing the lower court ordered his release. Carson appealed, arguing that the governing parole statutes authorized continued incarceration and a later revocation hearing.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Florida District Court Of Appeal Of Florida First District