LUIS LA-CASSE,
v.
MARK S. INCH, ETC.,
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 a pro se petition filed by Luis La-Casse, which was an attempt to circumvent a prior order barring him from filing further pro se pleadings related to his conviction without a certificate of merit. The court found his petition was a disguised motion for postconviction relief.
The court held that the petition was a disguised motion for postconviction relief and an attempt to evade the prior bar order. Therefore, it was dismissed without prejudice.
[1] A trial court may prohibit a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings relating to a specific case if the litigant's filings constitute an abuse of the judicial proce…
[2] A petition for writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to challenge the legality of a judgment of conviction or as a substitute for a motion for postconviction relief.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“In an apparent attempt to evade the trial court’s bar order, La-Casse filed the present pro se petition as an original proceeding in this court.”
Establishes the appellant's attempt to circumvent a prior court order.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLuis La-Casse, having filed multiple pro se postconviction relief motions, was previously barred by the trial court from filing any further pro se ple…
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 Gain Time Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
On at least five occasions following his 2007 conviction and sentence, Luis La-Casse has filed pro se pleadings in the trial court seeking postconviction relief
from his conviction and sentence in lower court case number F04-29879. In 2018, the trial court found that La-Casse’s filings were frivolous and that La-Casse’s conduct constituted an abuse of the judicial process.
The trial court entered an order prohibiting La-Casse from filing any pro se pleadings with the circuit court relating to F04-29879, unless “accompanied by a certificate of merit signed by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar.” The trial court also warned La-Casse that a violation of the bar order would subject him to sanctions.
We affirmed the trial court’s order. See La-Casse v. State, 271 So. 3d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
In an apparent attempt to evade the trial court’s bar order, La-Casse filed the present pro se petition as an original proceeding in this court. Though styled as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, La-Casse’s pleading is plainly a motion seeking postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, and is premised on factual allegations which must be determined in the first instance by the trial court. In order to comply with the trial court’s bar order, La-Casse cannot file such a motion with the trial court unless it is accompanied by a certificate of merit signed by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar. A petition for writ of habeas corpus may not be used to challenge the legality of a defendant’s judgment of conviction. A defendant must seek such relief, if at all, through the procedure established in rule 3.850. Nor may habeas corpus be used as a substitute for an otherwise procedurally barred motion for postconviction relief
under rule 3.850. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).
See also Corner v. State, 218 So. 3d 922, 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (issuing an order directing defendant to show cause why he should not be barred from filing further pro se pleadings, noting that defendant was “attempting to use the habeas corpus petition as a disguised rule 3.850 motion”).
La-Casse is cautioned that should this court determine that his actions constitute an abuse of the postconviction process, he will be subject to sanctions, including an order barring him from proceeding pro se in this court. The court may also issue written findings and forward those findings to the Florida Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action, including the forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2020).
Dismissed without prejudice.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)
- Corner v. State, 218 So. 3d 922 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
- La-Casse v. State, 271 So. 3d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)