TERRY M. DIX, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2004-10-22
No. 5D04-2192
PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
885 So. 2d 447 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2004)

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.

Synopsis

Terry Dix appeals the denial of his fifth Rule 3.800(a) motion seeking postconviction relief from his 1996 aggravated battery conviction. The court affirmed the denial and imposed a sanctions order prohibiting Dix from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, or motions related to his conviction and sentence, finding his successive filings constituted an abuse of the judicial system.


Holding

The court affirmed the denial of defendant's motion and imposed a blanket prohibition on all future pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to his conviction and sentence, requiring any further filings to be reviewed and signed by a licensed attorney.


Headnotes

[1] A court may restrict a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings in a case after providing notice and an opportunity to respond.

[2] Successive and repetitive filings that lack merit constitute an abuse of the judicial system.

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

Key Quotes

“his successive challenges to his judgment and sentence constitute an abuse of the judicial system”

Establishes the court's finding that defendant's pattern of repetitive filings amounts to abuse of judicial process

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

In 1996, defendant Terry Maurice Dix shot the victim in the chest. A jury found him guilty of aggravated battery while in possession of a firearm. He …

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.


Opinion of the Court
SAWAYA, C.J.

SAWAYA, C.J.

Defendant Terry Maurice Dix, a/k/a Ji-haad Abdullah Qawi, shot the victim in the chest in 1996. The jury found him guilty of aggravated battery while in possession of a firearm. He was sentenced as a habitual offender to eighteen years in the Department of Corrections, followed by five years of probation. He appealed, and this court affirmed. Dix v. State, 747 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999).

Now, Defendant appeals the denial of what is at least his fifth rule 3.800(a) motion, which is his eleventh postconviction filing here overall. This court issued a show cause order directing Defendant to demonstrate why he should not be prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, petitions, pleadings or motions pertaining to this case. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla.1999) (holding that a court can restrict future pro se pleadings if it first provides a pro se litigant notice and an opportunity to respond).

Finding no merit in his response, we conclude that his successive challenges to his judgment and sentence constitute an abuse of the judicial system. See, e.g., United States v. Robinson, 251 F. 3d 594 (7th Cir.2001) (finding that incessant, repetitive filings of frivolous motions burden court’s staff); Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla.2004) (explaining that a limit on successive claims is necessary to give due weight to the finality and the presumption of legality of a final judgment and to restore the public’s confidence in our criminal system of justice).

Therefore, in accordance with the Criminal Appeal Reform Act of 1996, and in order to conserve our strained postcon-viction judicial resources, we prohibit Defendant from filing any additional pro se appeals, pleadings, motions or petitions relating to his convictions and sentence in the underlying case. We do not take this action lightly, but “[ejnough is enough.” Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); see Gaffney v. State, 878 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Proctor v. State, 869 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

Any further pleadings filed in this court relating to his convictions and sentence must be reviewed and signed by an attorney, licensed to practice law in this state. The clerk of the court of the Fifth District Court of Appeal is directed not to accept any further pro se filings or pleadings from Defendant seeking relief from the convictions and sentence rendered in Brevard County, Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Court Case No. 05-1996-CF-26965.

AFFIRMED.

PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw