Full Opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ No. 1D19-1452 _____________________________ DAVID CHARLES SUSSMAN, Appellant, v. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, Appellee. _____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. John C. Cooper, Judge. October 14, 2020 PER CURIAM. We acknowledge that the sanctions against pro se filings of Appellant (on which the dismissal of his writ of mandamus was based) have been reversed by this Court in 1D17-3770. Nonetheless, we agree with Appellee that the lower court’s denial should be affirmed on two alternative bases—Appellant’s petition was untimely as filed more than 30 days following the resolution of his original grievance under section 95.11(8), Florida Statutes (2017); and secondly, he fails to show that he properly exhausted his administrative remedies. Jackson v. Parkhouse, 826 So. 2d 478, 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (stating that petitioner was required to “plead and prove” that he had exhausted administrative remedies regarding the Department’s denial of access to courts in order to be entitled to any mandamus relief against the Department or its employees). An inmate properly satisfies this exhaustion requirement by perfecting his appeal at the Bureau of Inmate Grievance appeals. “If the trial court reaches the right result, but for the wrong reasons, it will be upheld if there is any basis which would support the judgment in the record.” Dade County School Board v. Radio Station WQBA, 731 So. 2d 638, 644 (Fla. 1999). AFFIRMED. BILBREY, WINOKUR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________ David C. Sussman, pro se, Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kristen J. Lonergan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. 2