Jeremiah Butler v. Julie L. Jones Florida Department etc.
225 So. 3d 923
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Appellant Jeremiah Butler, a prisoner, filed a "Petition for Writ of Mandamus And Or Alternative Habeas Corpus" challenging the Florida Department of Corrections’ calculation of his gain time, forfeited gain time, and tentative release date (TRD).
- Butler attached administrative grievances and the Department’s responses showing an internal dispute: Butler calculated a 2036 TRD while the Department calculated 2058.
- He asserted the Department erred in failing to restore forfeited gain time allegedly resulting from an incorrect sexual offender classification.
- The circuit court dismissed the Petition, reasoning it was a collateral challenge to Butler’s judgment and sentence and thus the court lacked jurisdiction because it was not the sentencing court.
- The First District Court of Appeal found Butler was not collaterally attacking his underlying judgment or sentence but challenging the Department’s implementation and calculation of his sentence; it reversed and remanded for further consideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court had jurisdiction over Butler's petition challenging DOC's gain-time/TRD calculations | Butler: Petition challenges DOC’s calculation/forfeiture of gain time and TRD, not the legality of his sentence | DOC (via circuit court): Petition is a collateral attack on judgment/sentence; only sentencing court may hear it | Court: Petition challenges DOC’s implementation, not the underlying sentence; circuit court dismissal for lack of jurisdiction was error |
| Whether administrative remedies were required before filing in court | Butler: Presented administrative grievances and DOC responses with Petition (implying exhaustion) | DOC: Administrative exhaustion is prerequisite to judicial review of DOC calculations | Court: Cited precedent requiring exhaustion and one-year filing period but did not decide merits; remanded for further consideration of proper procedure |
Key Cases Cited
- Massey v. Crosby, 860 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 4th DCA) (administrative exhaustion required for challenges to DOC sentence calculations)
- Bedford v. State, 775 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 4th DCA) (same principle on exhaustion)
- Brown v. State, 13 So. 3d 1087 (Fla. 2d DCA) (same principle on administrative remedies)
- Head v. McNeil, 975 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 1st DCA) (mandamus available post-exhaustion when not seeking immediate release)
- Bush v. State, 945 So. 2d 1207 (Fla.) (one-year filing period and venue guidance for post-exhaustion writs)