Opinion
1D22-918
07-19-2023
Michael Swain, Petitioner, v. Florida Commission on Offender Review, Respondent.
Michael Swain, pro se, Petitioner. Rana Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark Hiers, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari-Original Jurisdiction.
Michael Swain, pro se, Petitioner.
Rana Wallace, General Counsel, and Mark Hiers, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender Review, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
B.L. THOMAS, J.
On February 2, 1976, the State charged Petitioner with breaking and entering a dwelling with assault (counts I and IV), sexual battery (counts II and V), and robbery (counts III and VI). The record on review indicates that Petitioner broke into a residence near the University of Miami where two female victims were living together. Petitioner repeatedly sexually battered the two victims at knifepoint, forced them to perform sexual acts upon one another, threatened to kill them, and then robbed them. The jury convicted Appellant of all charges except count IV, and the trial court ultimately sentenced Petitioner to life in prison on counts I, III, and VI, and ninety-nine years in prison on counts II and V.
In July 2020, the Florida Commission on Offender Review denied Petitioner's parole and kept his presumptive parole release date ("PPRD") in suspension after it cited Petitioner's lack of completion of transitional program participations, concerns about the serious nature of Petitioner's offenses, and an unsatisfactory release plan that did not contain transitional housing. While Petitioner contended that he had completed the transitional programs, the Commission found that the "Lifers" program that Petitioner had completed was an informal program and one that it did not recognize.
Petitioner filed a petition for writ of mandamus with the circuit court and argued that the Commission's decision was improper, irrational, conclusory, and violated his constitutional rights. The Commission argued that based on the serious and violent nature of Petitioner's offenses, combined with his failure to complete recognized transitional programs, it could not make the positive parole findings that section 947.18, Florida Statutes, requires in order to grant parole. The circuit court denied the petition for writ of mandamus, and Petitioner filed the present petition for writ of certiorari.
Petitioner has not demonstrated how the lower court departed from the essential requirements of the law. Section 947.18, Florida Statutes, states that "no person shall be placed on parole until and unless the commission finds that there is a reasonable probability that, if the person is placed on parole, he or she will live and conduct himself or herself as a respectable and law-abiding person." Examining the record shows that the Commission never made such a finding in any of the parole reviews and repeatedly found the opposite. The record also shows that, contrary to Petitioner's allegations, the Commission provided clear factual reasons for denying parole, including Petitioner's own failures to complete necessary steps in order for the Commission to place him on parole and abide by section 947.18, Florida Statutes. The circuit court did not apply the incorrect law when evaluating the mandamus petition.
Apart from this case, Petitioner has filed no less than thirty eight pleadings seeking various types of relief in the courts of this state. The frivolous nature of Petitioner's current claim-combined with his never-ending history of meritless petitions, motions, and appeals-constitutes an abuse of process that drains the state court system's limited time and resources and prevents timely consideration of non-frivolous matters filed by other litigants.
The Court denies the petition for writ of certiorari on the merits.
RAY AND M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.