ROGER DWAYNE DUNCOMBE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 barred a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings in the underlying case due to abuse of the judicial process and frivolous filings.
A pro se litigant who abuses the judicial process by filing frivolous and repetitive pleadings may be barred from further pro se filings in a particular case.
[1] A pro se litigant may be barred from filing further pleadings in a particular case when the filings constitute an abuse of the judicial process and frivolous attacks on c…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRoger Dwayne Duncombe filed multiple pro se pleadings attacking his convictions and sentences in a Brevard County criminal case, prompting the court t…
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 Litigant Restrictions cases and more on FLexlaw
We issued a Spencer1 show cause order directing Roger Dwayne Duneombe to show cause “why he should not be denied further pro se access to this Court for any proceeding to further attack the convictions and sentences” in the underlying case. Having carefully considered Mr. Duncombe’s response, we conclude that he is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.
Therefore, in order to conserve judicial resources, we prohibit Roger Dwayne Duneombe from filing with this Court any further pro se pleadings concerning Bre-vard County Circuit Court case number 05-2004-CF-051320-AXXX-XX. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning this case. Any further pleadings regarding this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk, unless they are filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. See Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409, 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“enough is enough”). 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. (2007); Simpkins v. State, 909 So.2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
PRO SE FILINGS PROHIBITED.
MONACO, C.J., SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)