RANDY STEVEN MARTIN, PETITIONER,
v.
MICHAEL W. MOORE, SEC. FL. DEPT. OF CORR., ETC., RESPONDENT
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.
Randy Steven Martin filed a successive petition for habeas corpus challenging his conviction and sentence. The Third District Court of Appeal denied the petition, finding that Martin was abusing the judicial process through repetitive and baseless filings, and directing the clerk to reject any further pro se pleadings from Martin regarding his conviction unless signed by an attorney.
The court found no meritorious issues in the petition and denied it. The court also found that Martin was abusing the judicial process by filing successive motions attempting to relitigate issues that were, could, or should have been raised in prior proceedings, with claims that were either repetitive or totally baseless.
[1] A party abuses the judicial process by filing successive motions that attempt to litigate issues that were, could, or should have been raised in prior proceedings.
[2] Claims that are not repetitive in successive motions are considered baseless.
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“the defendant is abusing the judicial process by filing successive motions that attempt to litigate issues that were, could or should have been raised in prior proceedings. Those claims that are not repetitive are totally baseless.”
Establishes the court's finding that Martin's petition constitutes an abuse of process and that his claims are either repetitive or meritless.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMartin had previously filed multiple post-conviction relief motions and appeals in state court regarding case no. 89-27519. He filed appeals in 1991 (…
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 Abuse Of Judicial Process cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, Randy Steven Martin, seeks a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Finding no meritorious issues, we deny.
ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Based upon the court’s careful review of the history of this case, and in keeping with the procedure employed by the Florida Supreme Court in Rivera v. State, 728 So. 2d 1165 (Fla.1998), we find that “the defendant is abusing the judicial process by filing successive motions that attempt to litigate issues that were, could or should have been raised in prior proceedings. Those claims that are not repetitive are totally baseless.” Harvey v. State, 734 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
The appeal of the denial of the defendant’s first motion for post conviction relief, case number 91-136, was dismissed by this court as untimely on January 29, 1991 without prejudice to seek a belated appeal. On February 11, 1991, defendant filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. On June 24, 1992, defendant appealed the denial of his second motion for post conviction relief. This court treated that appeal as a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking a belated appeal. The court granted the petition, considered the appeal, and affirmed. See Martin v. State, 623 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). On October 5, 1995, the defendant appealed the denial of what he entitled his “motion for rehearing,” which the circuit court treated as a successive rule 3.850 motion and denied. We affirmed. See Martin v. State, 684 So. 2d 1367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). During the state court proceedings listed above, the defendant filed three federal habeas petitions in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The first two were dismissed without prejudice; the third was dismissed as untimely. He also filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Florida Supreme Court. That petition was denied. See Martin v. Singletary, 717 So. 2d 534 (Fla.1998).
Accordingly, we direct the clerk of this court to reject any further appeals, petitions, or motions from Randy Steven Martin regarding the conviction and sentences imposed in lower court case no. 89-27519 unless such pleadings are signed by an attorney. See Harvey v. State, 734 So. 2d 1179, 1180; see also Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Dennis v. State, 685 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ace Patterson v. State, 788 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…70 So. 2d 685 (Fla.1985). The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. Mr. Patterson is admonished that the filing of any further successive and/or frivolous petitions or appeals may result in the imposition of sanctions. See Martin v. Moore, 781 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). PETITION DENIED. ALLEN, WOLF and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.…
-
McKIRE v. Moore, 826 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…t the clerk of this court to reject any further appeals, petitions, or motions from Gerald M. McKire regarding the conviction and sentences imposed in lower court case no. 87-3572 unless such pleadings are signed by an attorney. See Martin v. Moore, 781 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Harvey v. State, 734 So. 2d 1179, 1180; see also Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Dennis v. State, 685 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). Petition denied.…
Authorities Cited
- Rivera v. State, 728 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 1998)
- Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Dennis v. State, 685 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Emory Harvey v. State, 734 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Hinman v. Hinman, 623 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Martin v. State, 623 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)