BROOKS v. DIXON (2024)

Lorenzo Brooks seeks review of the trial court's order denying in part and dismissing in part his petition for writ of habeas corpus, in which he challenged being placed on close management status. As to the trial court's dismissal of ground three in the habeas petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, we affirm without further comment. However, for purposes of the trial court's denial of grounds one and two, we treat the appeal as a petition invoking our certiorari jurisdiction and deny the petition on the merits. See Thomas v. State, Fla. Dep't of Corrs., 89 So. 3d 300, 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (treating the proceeding as an appeal of the trial court's dismissal of certain mandamus claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies but reviewing the trial court's denial on the merits of the remaining claims under the “higher certiorari standard”); see also Owens v. Jones, 200 So. 3d 1289, 1289 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016); Williams v. Tucker, 87 So. 3d 1270, 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).

Affirmed in part and Denied on the merits in part.

Per Curiam.

Osterhaus, C.J., and Lewis and Winokur, JJ., concur.