Opinion
Case No. SC03-980.
September 19, 2003.
Lower Tribunal No. 1D02-4929.
The petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied as successive. See Jenkins v. Wainwright, 322 So.2d 477, 478 (Fla. 1975) (declaring that once a petitioner seeks relief in a particular court by means of a petition for extraordinary writ, he has picked his forum and is not entitled to a second or third opportunity for the same relief by the same writ in a different court). See also State ex. rel. N. St. Lucie River Drainage Dist. v. Kanner, 11 So.2d 889, 890 (Fla. 1943) ("It is well settled that mandamus is the proper remedy to compel a court to exercise its jurisdiction when such court possesses jurisdiction and refuses to exercise it, but mandamus cannot be maintained to control or direct the manner in which such court shall act in the lawful exercise of its jurisdiction."); State v. Petteway, 117 So. 696 (Fla. 1928) (mandamus may not be used to correct alleged error or to compel a court to exercise its discretion in any particular way).
WELLS, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO and BELL, JJ., concur.