Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

965 So. 2d 176

Docket No. 1D06-3819.

Brunner v. McDonough

William BRUNNER, Petitioner, v. James R. McDONOUGH, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Respondent.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 14, 2007.

Rehearing Denied October 2, 2007.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2007-08-14

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 2010

1 state decisions

Relies on 878 So. 2d 361 - Schmidt v. Crusoe · 949 So. 2d 1181 - Crosby v. FLORIDA PAROLE COM'N

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-08-14

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1William Brunner, pro se, for Petitioner.

¶2Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Joy A. Stubbs, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Petitioner seeks certiorari review of the circuit court's denial of his petition for writ of mandamus. Specifically, petitioner challenges the circuit court's order imposing a lien on his inmate trust account and its determination that he was provided with all process due during his prison disciplinary proceeding.

¶5Since the underlying action constitutes a collateral criminal proceeding, the circuit court did not have statutory authority to impose a lien for court costs and filing fees. See Schmidt v. Crusoe,878 So.2d 361, 367 (Fla.2003); Crosby v. Fla. Parole Comm'n,949 So.2d 1181, 1183 (Fla. 1 DCA 2007). Therefore, we GRANT this petition for writ of certiorari inasmuch as it contested the circuit court's order imposing a lien and QUASH such order. However, we conclude that Petitioner's due process claims are without merit. Consequently, we DENY that portion of the petition alleging due process violations.

¶6BARFIELD, ALLEN, and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

/965/so2d/176 · .json · Public domain