CHARLES EDWARD STALLWORTH,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
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 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, enforced its prior order to show cause by prohibiting Charles Edward Stallworth from filing further pro se appeals and petitions related to his criminal case, after he failed to respond to the order showing good cause. The court balanced Stallworth's right to court access against the court's need to manage its docket and prevent frivolous filings.
The court held that Stallworth failed to demonstrate good cause because he did not file a response to the show cause order introducing new argument or information. Accordingly, the court prohibited Stallworth from filing further pro se filings related to case number F01-12950A, although he may file if an attorney licensed in Florida reviews and signs the filings.
[1] A court may prohibit a pro se litigant from filing further appeals, petitions, motions, or proceedings related to a specific criminal conviction and sentence after issuin…
[2] The right of pro se access to courts must be balanced against a court's need to allocate finite resources to legitimate appeals and petitions.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“We must balance Stallworth's pro se right of access to courts with this Court's need to devote its finite resources to legitimate appeals and petitions, recognizing the seriousness of the sanction when the litigant is a criminal defendant.”
Establishes the analytical framework the court uses to determine whether to impose the sanction of prohibiting 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 intelligenceStallworth had filed a mandamus petition that the court denied on October 23, 2019. The court issued an order to show cause why Stallworth should not …
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 Pro Se Litigant Access To Courts cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
On October 23, 2019, this Court issued an opinion denying Charles Edward Stallworth’s mandamus petition. Our opinion contained an order to show cause why Stallworth should not be prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or proceedings related to his criminal conviction and sentence in lower tribunal case number F01-12950A. Stallworth did not file a response to our show cause order. We must balance Stallworth’s pro se right of access to courts with this Court’s need to devote its finite resources to legitimate appeals and petitions, recognizing the seriousness of the sanction when the litigant is a criminal defendant. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999).
After issuing an order to show cause and giving the defendant an opportunity to respond, this Court may prevent further such filings in the absence of a showing of good cause. Id. Because Stallworth did not file a response to our show cause order introducing new argument or information for our consideration, we conclude that Stallworth has not demonstrated good cause to justify further pro se filings of appeals, petitions, motions, and other proceedings with this Court. We direct the Clerk of the Third District Court of Appeal to refuse to accept from Stallworth any further pro se filings related to lower tribunal case number F01-12950A; provided, however, that the Clerk of the Third District Court of Appeal may accept filings related to case number
F01-12950A if such filings have been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a licensed member of the Florida Bar in good standing. Any further and unauthorized pro se filings by Stallworth will subject him to sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Florida Department of Corrections for consideration by it for disciplinary action, pursuant to section 944.279(1) of the Florida Statutes. Order issued.