ANTHONY P. SVOBODA, PETITIONER,
v.
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.
Anthony Svoboda petitioned for a belated appeal but made false statements under oath about his location when filing the notice of appeal. The court appointed a commissioner who found Svoboda had committed perjury, and the court denied the petition while recommending disciplinary proceedings against Svoboda under Florida Statutes § 944.279(1).
The court denied Svoboda's petition for belated appeal and, finding that Svoboda deliberately filed a falsified document and committed perjury, directed that a certified copy of the opinion be forwarded to the Department of Corrections for disciplinary procedures under Florida Statutes § 944.279(1).
[1] A prisoner who knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth brings false information or evidence before the court is subject to disciplinary procedures by the Depar…
[2] A court shall issue a written finding and direct that a certified copy be forwarded to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures when a prisoner is found to…
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 commissioner found that petitioner filed a falsified document. While the commissioner did not use the word "knowingly" or "intentionally," the findings in full establish that petitioner deliberately filed a falsified document.”
Court's conclusion that Svoboda's false statements constituted deliberate falsification justifying disciplinary sanctions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSvoboda filed a petition for belated appeal, swearing under oath that he filed his notice of appeal on May 31, 2004, while at Jefferson Correctional I…
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 Petition For Belated Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, J.
Petitioner, Anthony Svoboda, filed a petition seeking a belated appeal, alleging under oath that the facts stated in his petition were true. The State was ordered to respond, and the State pointed out that the Department of Corrections’ (“DOC”) records contradicted the petitioner’s own sworn allegations. This court appointed a commissioner to conduct an evidentiary hearing and make findings of fact and a recommendation to this court regarding petitioner’s “Request for a Belated Appeal”, as well as the State’s specific claim that petitioner, by all indications, has filed a falsified document with this court. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(c). The commissioner held the hearing, and the State has now filed the Commissioner’s Report. The commissioner concluded petitioner had lied under oath. Specifically, the commissioner found although petitioner testified he served a copy of his pleadings on the state attorney, he did not. More important, the commissioner found that petitioner testified that he filed his notice of appeal while he was at the Jefferson Correctional Institute in Monticello on 31 May 2004. The DOC records show that petitioner was, at that point in time, in the Central Florida Reception Center (CFRC), East Unit, not at Jefferson Correctional Institute. We deny the petition with recommendations to the Department of Corrections.
Based upon the testimony at the hearing, the commissioner recommended petitioner’s request be denied. We accept the commissioner’s recommendation; however, in light of his finding of perjury, and to protect the sanctity of the court proceedings, this court takes additional action beyond merely denying petitioner’s petition.
This court receives many petitions for belated appeal, yet the allegations petitioners have to make are very minimal. Petitioners should not be allowed to cavalierly lie to this court — it requires this court to order a commissioner’s report, requires the judge to hold a hearing, requires the prisoner’s transportation to this hearing, requires the judge to issue a commissioner’s report, and requires this court to then rule upon that report.
In the present case, the appointed commissioner found that petitioner filed a falsified document. While the commissioner did not use the word “knowingly” or “intentionally,” the findings in full establish that petitioner deliberately filed a falsified document. Acting upon the commissioner’s findings, petitioner deserves the sanction of section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes, which states:
A prisoner who is found by a court ... to have brought a frivolous or malicious collateral criminal proceeding, which is filed after September 30, 2004, or who knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth brought false information or evidence before the court, is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections. The court shall issue a written finding and direct that a certified copy be forwarded to the appropriate institution or facility for disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the department as provided in s. 944.09.
See also Nixon v. State, 921 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Miller v. State, 917 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Wilson v. State, 916 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Cole v. State, 913 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Valentine v. State, 873 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
Based upon the commissioner’s recommendation, we deny Svoboda’s petition for belated appeal. In light of the assertion made by Svoboda in his petition, under penalty of perjury, that he had requested an appeal, we direct that a certified copy of this opinion be forwarded to the Jefferson Correctional Institution for the consideration of disciplinary procedures pursuant to section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes (2004), and a copy of the disposition report be forwarded to this court, the attorney general’s office and the hearing commissioner. PLEUS, C.J., and ORFINGER, J„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Oquendo v. State, 2 So. 3d 1001 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…frivolous or malicious action, or has knowingly or recklessly made false allegations, it should make written findings and refer him to the appropriate prison authorities for disciplinary procedures. § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); Svoboda v. State, 932 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); see also Jones v. State, 33 Fla. L. Weekly D2000, D2001, — So. 3d-,-, 2008 WL 3540219 (Fla. 1st DCA Aug. 15, 2008). Postconviction movants should also remain aware that penalties for direct contempt of court or perjury may be i…
-
Rivera v. State, 943 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…s office. We conclude by emphasizing that “[tjhis court receives many petitions for belated appeal, yet the allegations petitioners have to make are very minimal. Petitioners should not be allowed to cavalierly lie to this court-” Svoboda v. State, 932 So. 2d 545, 546 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). We have not suffered dishonesty lightly in the past, Nixon v. State, 921 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Miller v. State, 917 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), and we will not relax our intolerance now. PETITION DENIED. GRI…
-
Spaulding v. State, 965 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…caution the appellants that continued filing of repetitive claims will result in this court no longer accepting their pro se filings and other sanctions. State v. Spencer, 751.So. 2d 47 (Fla.1999); § 944.279, Fla. Stat. (2006). See Svoboda v. State, 932 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). The appellants allege that the statewide prosecutor has exclusive jurisdiction to prosecute offenses that are committed in more than one county. Here, because the fraudulent checks were cashed in numerous counties, in addition…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- Valentine v. State, 873 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- McCRAY v. State, 913 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Nixon v. State, 921 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Dywayne Tony Wilson v. State, 916 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- SITE2SHOP.COM v. MTM Trading (PTY) Ltd., 917 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Miller v. State, 917 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)