947.002
Intent.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
947.002 Intent.—
(1) It is the purpose of this chapter to establish an objective means for determining and establishing parole dates for inmates.
(2) Objective parole criteria will be designed to give primary weight to the seriousness of the offender’s present criminal offense and the offender’s past criminal record. In considering the risk of recidivism, practice has shown that the best predictor is prior record.
(3) The chair shall be the agency head. While the commission is responsible for making decisions on the granting and revoking of parole, the chair shall establish, execute, and be held accountable for all administrative policy decisions. The routine administrative decisions are the full responsibility of the chair.
(4) Hearing examiners are assigned on the basis of caseload needs as determined by the chair.
(5) It is the intent of the Legislature that the decision to parole an inmate from the incarceration portion of the inmate’s sentence is an act of grace of the state and shall not be considered a right.
History.—s. 1, ch. 78-417; s. 1, ch. 81-322; s. 2, ch. 82-171; s. 34, ch. 83-131; s. 37, ch. 86-183; s. 67, ch. 88-122; s. 17, ch. 89-531; s. 20, ch. 90-337; s. 1, ch. 93-2; s. 3, ch. 93-61; s. 1667, ch. 97-102.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Florida Parole Commission v. Spaziano
Florida Parole Commission v. Spaziano (2010)
“We recognize that section 947.002, Florida Statutes (2009), titled "Intent," confirms that parole is not a matter of right, but is one of legislative grace.”
State of Florida v. Budry Michel (2018)
“" § 947.002, Fla. Stat. If an offender convicted of first-degree murder has a high salient score, that offender's range of months for the presumptive parole release date could span from hundreds of months to nearly ten thousand months.”
Williams v. Florida Parole Com'n (1993)
“The elaborate procedural requirements laid out in chapter 947, Florida Statutes, and the implementing rules in chapter 23-21, Florida Administrative Code, are obviously intended to accomplish the purpose of the "Objective Parole Guidelines Act of 1978" that is, as stated in…”
Rooks v. State (2017)
“” § 947.002, Fla. Stat. (2015). The hearing examiner may consider the aggravating and mitigating circumstances—none of which provide for the level of consideration of the diminished culpability of youth at the time of the offense as sentencing judges now consider…”
FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COM'N v. Paige (1985)
“§ 947.002(1), Fla. Stat. (1981). *820 Section 947.”
Albert E. Paschal v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc. (1984)
“” Fla.Stat.Ann. § 947.002(1) (1983 Supp.). The legislature intended to establish an “objective means for determining and establishing parole criteria .”
Angelo Atwell v. State of Florida (2016)
“” See § 947.002, Fla. Stat. (2015). Under this statutory scheme, twenty-five years after Atwell was sentenced, the Commission on Offender Review conducted a parole hearing and set Atwell’s presumptive parole release date, which is the earliest date he may be released from prison…”
Roberson v. FLA. PAROLE & PROBATION COM'N (1983)
“§ 947.002, Fla. Stat. (1981). Despite this concerted effort, abuse of discretion or misinterpretation of the law continued to creep into the process.”
Daniels v. Florida Parole & Probation Comm'n (1981)
“Parole and Probation Com. supra, and has provided that such dates shall be binding absent good cause for exceptional circumstances.”
Gobie v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COM'N (1982)
“" However, neither the statutes nor the Commission's rules provide guidelines concerning the invocation of § 947.”
Michael Earl Staton v. Louie L. Wainwright and Maurice G. Crockett (1982)
“Although the Florida parole statutes were revised in 1978 to establish objective means for determining and establishing parole dates for inmates, Fla.Stat. § 947.002, the Commission retains substantial discretionary powers over the granting of a parole: No person shall be placed…”
Meola v. Department of Corrections (1998)
“Article I, section 10 of the Constitution of the United States of America provides, in pertinent part: No State shall .”
— 947.002(1) — 7 cases
Williams v. Florida Parole Com'n (1993)
“The elaborate procedural requirements laid out in chapter 947, Florida Statutes, and the implementing rules in chapter 23-21, Florida Administrative Code, are obviously intended to accomplish the purpose of the "Objective Parole Guidelines Act of 1978" that is, as stated in…”
FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COM'N v. Paige (1985)
“§ 947.002(1), Fla. Stat. (1981). *820 Section 947.”
Daniels v. Florida Parole & Probation Comm'n (1981)
“Parole and Probation Com. supra, and has provided that such dates shall be binding absent good cause for exceptional circumstances.”
Gobie v. FLORIDA PAROLE AND PROBATION COM'N (1982)
“" However, neither the statutes nor the Commission's rules provide guidelines concerning the invocation of § 947.”
Albert E. Paschal v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc. (1984)
“” Fla.Stat.Ann. § 947.002(1) (1983 Supp.). The legislature intended to establish an “objective means for determining and establishing parole criteria .”
— 947.002(2) — 6 cases
Meola v. Department of Corrections (1998)
“Article I, section 10 of the Constitution of the United States of America provides, in pertinent part: No State shall .”
Angelo Atwell v. State of Florida (2016)
“” See § 947.002, Fla. Stat. (2015). Under this statutory scheme, twenty-five years after Atwell was sentenced, the Commission on Offender Review conducted a parole hearing and set Atwell’s presumptive parole release date, which is the earliest date he may be released from prison…”
— 947.002(5) — 2 cases
Florida Parole Commission v. Spaziano (2010)
“We recognize that section 947.002, Florida Statutes (2009), titled "Intent," confirms that parole is not a matter of right, but is one of legislative grace.”
Angelo Atwell v. State of Florida (2016)
“” See § 947.002, Fla. Stat. (2015). Under this statutory scheme, twenty-five years after Atwell was sentenced, the Commission on Offender Review conducted a parole hearing and set Atwell’s presumptive parole release date, which is the earliest date he may be released from prison…”
— 947.002(6) — 2 cases
Albert E. Paschal v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc. (1984)
“” Fla.Stat.Ann. § 947.002(1) (1983 Supp.). The legislature intended to establish an “objective means for determining and establishing parole criteria .”
Tubb v. FLORIDA PAROLE COM'N (1991)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.