PAUL WAYNE MERRITT
v.
WARDEN ROBERT BRYNER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court dismissed an appeal challenging an order that sanctioned a pro se litigant for filing frivolous pleadings. The dismissal was based on the untimeliness of the appeal, as an untimely motion for rehearing did not toll the deadline for filing the notice of appeal.
The notice of appeal was untimely. An untimely motion for rehearing does not toll the rendition of the order under review, and therefore does not extend the time for filing a notice of appeal.
[1] An untimely motion for rehearing does not toll the rendition date of an order for purposes of calculating the thirty-day deadline to file a notice of appeal under Florida…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“any citizen, including a citizen attacking his or her conviction, abuses the right to pro se access by filing repetitious and frivolous pleadings, thereby diminishing the ability of the courts to devote their finite resources to the consideration of legitimate claims.”
This quote from State v. Spencer explains the court's rationale for sanctioning frivolous pro se filings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner received a disciplinary report after a court sanctioned him for filing repetitive and frivolous pro se pleadings. He sought a writ of manda…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Frivolous Pleadings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks review of an order dismissing a petition for writ of mandamus. The petition challenged a disciplinary report that Petitioner received after the Fourth District Court of Appeal issued a Spencer order that sanctioned him for filing repetitious and frivolous pro se pleadings. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (“[A]ny citizen, including a citizen attacking his or her conviction, abuses the right to pro se access by filing repetitious and frivolous pleadings, thereby diminishing the ability of the courts to devote their finite resources to the consideration of legitimate claims.”).
Because it appears that the lower court denied Petitioner’s claim on the merits, this Court converted the proceeding from an appeal to certiorari. See generally Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 720 So. 2d 216, 218 (Fla. 1998) (“Sheley II”) (“[O]nce an inmate has had a full review on the merits of a Parole Commission order in the circuit court, he or she is not entitled to a second plenary appeal of the order in the district court.”); see also Fla. R. App. P. 9.040(c) (“If a party seeks an improper remedy, the cause shall be treated as if the proper remedy had been sought . . . .”). Even so, we lack jurisdiction to proceed. Although Petitioner filed a notice of appeal within thirty days of rendition of the order denying his motion for rehearing, that motion was untimely. As untimely, the motion for rehearing did not toll rendition of the order under review. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(h).
Therefore, the notice of appeal, which was filed more than thirty days after rendition of the order under review, was untimely. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b). So, too, the notice of appeal as a redesignated petition for writ of certiorari was untimely. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.100(c)(1) (“The following shall be filed within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed . . . a petition for writ of certiorari.”). DISMISSED. B.L. THOMAS, RAY, and LONG, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 720 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 1998)