TERRY LEE DUNCAN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 held that successive motions for post-conviction relief are procedurally barred and the defendant is abusing the judicial process.
The defendant was convicted of attempted first-degree murder, armed robbery, and armed burglary in 1993. This was his third motion for post-conviction…
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.
In 1993, defendant was convicted of attempted first degree murder, armed robbery, and armed burglary. This court affirmed the conviction on direct appeal, and has affirmed the denials of two previous motions for post conviction relief.
As the Florida Supreme Court has repeatedly held, successive motions for post conviction relief are procedurally barred. See Christopher v. State, 489 So. 2d 22 (Fla.1986); Francois v. State, 470 So. 2d 687 (Fla.1985). The defendant is abusing the judicial process by filing successive motions that attempt to litigate issues that were, could, or should have been raised either on direct appeal or in his previous motions. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of his motion for post conviction relief.
We caution defendant that “a prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous suit, action, claim, proceeding or appeal in any court is subject to having his or her gain time forfeited.” O’Brien, 689 So. 2d at 337 (citing section 944.28(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1997) (“All or any part of the gain-time earned by a prisoner according to the provisions of law is subject to forfeiture if such prisoner ... is found by a court to have brought a frivolous suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal in any court.”)).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (22 total)
-
McKENLEY v. State, 937 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…nce of counsel. The trial court denied it on the ground that it was successive. The trial court also noted that the defendant risks forfeiture of prison gain time as a possible sanction for filing repeated and frivolous motions. See Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)(cautioning that a prisoner’s gain time is subject to forfeiture if he or she is found to have brought a frivolous suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal in any court). A trial court may dismiss a successive motion for post-co…
-
Simon v. State, 904 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…90-45486.1 We caution the defendant that it is an abuse of the judicial process to file successive motions in an attempt to litigate issues that were, could, or should have [*488] been raised on direct appeal or in previous motions. Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237, 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see Johnson v. State, 899 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Lewis v. State, 900 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Washington v. State, 867 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). “[A]n…
-
Emory Harvey v. State, 734 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…to reject any further pro se appeals, petitions or motions from Emory Harvey regarding the convictions and sentences imposed in lower case numbers 77-25205, 90-18417 and 90-19890, unless such pleadings are signed by an attorney. See Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Hall v. State, 690 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review denied, 705 So. 2d 570 (Fla.1998); Dennis v. State, 685 So. 2d 1373, 1375 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). We also advise the defendant that a prisoner who is found by a court to have…
Previewing 3 of 22 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Tortoise Island Cmtys., Inc. v. The Moorings Ass'n, Inc., 489 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 1986)
- Francois v. State, 470 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 1985)