AARON K. MARSH, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
The court struck the pro se petition because the petitioner was represented by counsel and denied the petition for writ of mandamus.
Petitioner, a detained sexual violent predator, filed a pro se petition for writ of mandamus and injunctive relief. He was represented by appointed co…
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 Pro Se Pleadings cases and more on FLexlaw
ROTHENBERG, Judge.
The petitioner, Aaron Marsh, who is currently detained by the State of Florida pursuant to Florida’s Sexual Violent Predator Act, section 394.901, Florida Statutes, seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to rule on a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed with that court, and for injunctive relief based upon double jeopardy grounds. As these pleadings were filed pro se; the petitioner is represented by counsel;1 and there is no indication that his appointed counsel has adopted the instant pleadings, we hereby strike the petition. See Mourra v. State, 884 So. 2d 316, 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)(holding that pleadings filed by a criminal defendant who is represented by counsel are generally treated as a nullity), review denied, 891 So. 2d 552 (Fla.2004); Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472 (Fla.2003)(same).
We additionally note that the petitioner’s mandamus claim is now moot as the trial court has ruled on his petition for writ of habeas corpus, and that his double jeopardy claim is meritless. See Westerheide v. State, 831 So. 2d 93 (Fla.2002)(upholding Ryce Act against double jeopardy, ex post facto, due process, and equal protection challenges).
Petition denied.
. Conflict-free counsel was appointed to represent the petitioner on October 7, 2005. The instant pro se petition was filed on October 20, 2005.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rodriguez v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 973 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…the circuit court’s final order. See Fire & Casualty Ins. Co. of Conn. v. Sealey, 810 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Because appellant was represented by counsel, the pro se “Motion for Relief from Judgment” was a legal nullity. See Marsh v. State, 919 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Booker v. State, 807 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). As such, the pro se motion likewise did not postpone rendition of the trial court’s final order. APPEAL DISMISSED. KAHN, and LEWIS, JJ., concur. BENTON, J., DISSENTS WITH…
-
Thatcher Gates v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…472 (Fla. 2003) (holding that, generally, a defendant has no right to represent himself in an extraordinary writ petition in the appellate court while he is represented by counsel in the criminal case pending in the lower tribunal); Marsh v. State, 919 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (finding a pro se petition for writ of mandamus a nullity where petitioner was represented by counsel below in an involuntary civil commitment proceeding). BILBREY, NORDBY, and LONG, JJ., concur. _____________________________ N…
-
McCray v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…472 (Fla. 2003) (holding that, generally, a defendant has no right to represent himself in an extraordinary writ petition in the appellate court while he is represented by counsel in the criminal case pending in the lower tribunal); Marsh v. State, 919 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (finding a pro se petition for writ of mandamus a nullity where petitioner was represented by counsel below in an involuntary civil commitment proceeding). LEWIS, ROBERTS, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur. __________________________…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Logan v. State, 846 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 2003)
- Westerheide v. State, 831 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 2002)
- Bennie Frank Smith v. State, 884 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Kasim McDONALD v. State, 884 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)