RONALD MCKEEHAN, 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.
Ronald McKeehan filed his fourth mandamus petition alleging the State presented false evidence at trial. The Fifth District Court of Appeal denied the petition on the merits and barred McKeehan from further pro se filings in that court, finding his successive claims constituted an abuse of process and frivolous litigation that wasted judicial resources.
The court denied McKeehan's mandamus petition on the merits and prohibited him from filing any further pro se pleadings concerning the underlying case with this court. Only filings by a member of the Florida Bar in good standing will be accepted regarding this case.
[1] A mandamus petition raising a successive claim previously decided on the merits constitutes an abuse of process.
[2] Courts may prohibit a party from filing further pro se pleadings in a specific case to conserve judicial resources.
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“Enough is enough.”
The court's justification for denying successive frivolous filings from the same litigant, citing prior precedent.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMcKeehan filed a mandamus petition alleging the State presented false evidence at trial. This was his fourth mandamus petition raising similar claims …
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 Successive Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this, his fourth mandamus petition, Ronald McKeehan is again alleging that the State presented false evidence at trial. We deny his mandamus petition on the merits and hold that he is barred from further pro se filings in this court on the basis that his present petition raises a successive claim previously decided on the merits and, therefore, constitutes an abuse of process. See Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“Enough is enough.”); see also Britt v. State, 931 So. 2d 209, 210 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (finding that defendant’s pro se filings had become frivolous, an abuse of process, and a waste of the taxpayers’ money); Glasco v. State, 914 So. 2d 512, 512 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants).
Accordingly, in order to conserve judicial resources, we prohibit McKeehan from filing with this court any further pro se pleadings concerning Orange County, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court case number 01-183. The Clerk of this court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning this case from Ronald McKee-han. Unless filed by a member of the Florida Bar in good standing, additional pleadings regarding this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk. The Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary procedures. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2005); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
PETITION DENIED; Future Pro Se Filings PROHIBITED; Certified Opinion FORWARDED to Department of Corrections.
GRIFFIN, SAWAYA and PALMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- Armbruster v. State, 931 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Glasco v. State, 914 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)