MARCUS J. HARRIS,
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 appellate court dismissed a pro se petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus, which sought to compel the lower court to justify its denial of additional jail credit. The court found that the issues raised had already been affirmed on appeal twice, establishing the law of the case.
The appellate court denied the petition for a writ of mandamus. The court held that the issues raised by the petitioner had already been decided and affirmed on prior appeals, and therefore, the doctrine of the law of the case applied.
[1] A petition seeking mandamus relief may be dismissed when it essentially seeks further review of a trial court's order that has already been affirmed by the appellate cour…
[2] An appellate court's affirmance of a trial court's order establishes the law of the case.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“While Harris’s petition requests an order directing the lower court “to produce authentic documentation to justify its denial of prior credit before probation violation,” what Harris’s petition essentially seeks is further review by this Court of the trial court’s orders denying Harris’s post-conviction motions seeking additional jail credit.”
This quote explains the nature of the petitioner's request and frames it as a request for further review of previously decided matters.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioner, Marcus Harris, acting pro se, filed a petition characterized as a writ of mandamus. He sought an order directing the lower court to ju…
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 Postconviction Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner Marcus Harris, acting pro se, seeks from this Court what Harris characterizes as a writ of mandamus. While Harris’s petition requests an order
directing the lower court “to produce authentic documentation to justify its denial of prior credit before probation violation,” what Harris’s petition essentially seeks is further review by this Court of the trial court’s orders denying Harris’s post-conviction motions seeking additional jail credit.
On November 2, 2018, the trial court entered a detailed order explaining its rationale for denying Harris’s first post-conviction motion seeking additional jail credit. Harris appealed this November 2018 order, and this Court affirmed the trial court’s order. Harris v. State, 271 So. 3d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (table). Harris then filed a second post-conviction motion that, in part, again sought additional jail credit. On April 18, 2019, the trial court entered another detailed order denying Harris’s second post-conviction motion. Harris appealed this order, and this Court affirmed the trial court’s April 2019 order. Harris v. State, No, 3D19-953, 2019 WL 2880495 (Fla. 3d July 3, 2019).1
Dressed as a petition seeking mandamus relief, Harris’s petition again challenges the trial court’s denial of his post-conviction motions seeking additional jail credit. We dismiss Harris’s petition because this Court has twice affirmed the trial court’s denial of Harris’s post-conviction effort to obtain additional jail credit.
Once a trial court’s order has been affirmed by the appellate court, it becomes the law of the case. See Kelly v. State, 907 So. 2d 550, 551 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).
We caution Harris that further challenges in this Court to the trial court’s November 2018 and April 2019 orders may result in an order from this Court prohibiting Harris from further pro se filings.
Petition dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Kelly v. State, 907 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Harris v. State, 271 So. 3d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)