Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

TAHJ KRAUS vs. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 89-002147RX (1989)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 89-002147RX Visitors: 2
Judges: J. D. PARRISH
Agency: Department of Corrections
Latest Update: Aug. 28, 1989
Summary: On April 26, 1989, Petitioner, Tajh Kraus, filed a Petition for Rule Challenge which sought to invalidate Rule 33-5.006(8), Florida Administrative Code. The Department of Corrections (Department) timely filed a Motion to Dismiss which was granted by order entered on May 17, 1989. That order authorized Petitioner to file an amended petition within fifteen days. On July 17, 1989, the undersigned entered an order directing Petitioner to show cause why a final order should not be entered in this cau
More
89-2147

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


TAJH KRAUS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 89-2147RX

) DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, )

)

Respondent. )

)


FINAL ORDER


On April 26, 1989, Petitioner, Tajh Kraus, filed a Petition for Rule Challenge which sought to invalidate Rule 33-5.006(8), Florida Administrative Code. The Department of Corrections (Department) timely filed a Motion to Dismiss which was granted by order entered on May 17, 1989. That order authorized Petitioner to file an amended petition within fifteen days. On July 17, 1989, the undersigned entered an order directing Petitioner to show cause why a final order should not be entered in this cause or to file an amended petition as previously ordered. Petitioner has not timely filed an amended petition or otherwise responded to the orders entered in this matter.


Section 120.56(2), Florida Statutes, requires that a Petitioner "state with particularity facts sufficient to show the person seeking relief is substantially affected by the rule and facts sufficient to show the invalidity of the rule." Despite opportunities to correct the deficiencies of the petition, Petitioner has failed to allege facts sufficient to show the invalidity of the rule.


In Moultrie v. Florida Department of Corrections, 496 So.2d 191 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), the court found that the prisoner had standing to challenge the rule because he had adequately pled the factual basis for the claimed invalidity and the ongoing damage or adverse effect that the invalid rule had imposed upon him. In this instance, the Petitioner has not met that burden.

Based on the foregoing, it is ORDERED:

That the Petition for Rule Challenge in the above-styled cause, Case No.

89-2147RX, is hereby DISMISSED.


DONE AND ENTERED this 28th day of August, 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.


JOYOUS D. PARRISH

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of August, 1989.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Tajh Kraus 114616

Holmes Correctional Institute Post Office Box 190-B-26 Bonifay, Florida 32425


Ann Cocheu

Assistant Attorney General Department of Legal Affairs Suite 1603, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050


Richard L. Dugger, Secretary Department of Corrections 1311 Winewood Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2500


Louis A. Vargas General Counsel

Department of Corrections 1311 Winewood Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2500


Liz Cloud, Chief

Bureau of Administrative Code Room 1802, The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

Carroll Webb, Executive Director Administrative Procedures Committee Room 120, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1300


NOTICE OF RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW


A PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS FINAL ORDER IS ENTITLED TO JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES. REVIEW PROCEEDINGS ARE GOVERNED BY THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. SUCH PROCEEDINGS ARE COMMENCED BY FILING ONE COPY OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE AGENCY CLERK OF THE DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND A SECOND COPY, ACCOMPANIED BY FILING FEES PRESCRIBED BY LAW, WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST DISTRICT, OR WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL IN THE APPELLATE DISTRICT WHERE THE PARTY RESIDES. THE NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RENDITION OF THE ORDER TO BE REVIEWED.


Docket for Case No: 89-002147RX
Issue Date Proceedings
Aug. 28, 1989 Final Order (hearing held , 2013). CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 89-002147RX
Issue Date Document Summary
Aug. 28, 1989 DOAH Final Order Petitioner's rule challenge dismissed as he failed to plead how rule adversely affected his interests.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer