JOHNSON v. STATE (2025)

Mark A. Johnson asserts a right to parole upon serving the 25-year mandatory minimum portion of a life sentence. But no such right exists. This is so because “[p]arole in Florida is granted by the sovereign as a matter of grace rather than of right, and the State may offer such grace under and subject to such conditions as it may consider most conducive to accomplish the desired purpose.” Panzavecchia v. Crockett, 379 So. 2d 1047, 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); see also § 947.002(5), Fla. Stat. (expressing “the intent of the Legislature that the decision to parole an inmate from the incarceration portion of [his] sentence is an act of grace of the state and shall not be considered a right”). The Florida Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that chapter 947 of the Florida Statutes provides the structure through which that grace is exercised—“chapter 947 leaves the ultimate parole decision to the discretion of the Commission guided by its rules” and “the final parole decision will depend upon the commission's finding that the prisoner meets the conditions provided in section 947.18.” Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n v. Paige, 462 So. 2d 817, 820 (Fla. 1985) (citing May v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 435 So. 2d 834, 837 (Fla. 1983)). We therefore affirm the thorough and well-reasoned order of the trial court denying Johnson's petition for habeas corpus.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.