LOUIS OAKLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2009-10-09
No. 5D09-2221
GRIFFIN, PALMER, and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
21 So. 3d 76 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2009) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Louis Oakley (defendant) appeals the final order entered by the trial court summarily denying his third motion for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. The denial was based on the conclusion that the defendant’s motion was untimely, successive, and meritless. We affirm. The defendant is warned that the filing of any additional successive and frivolous pro se petitions or appeals attacking his convictions and sentences entered in Ninth Judicial Circuit Court Case No. 48-2003-CF-2533-0 will result in the issuance of an order to show cause why he should not be denied further access to this court. See State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla. 1999).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, PALMER, and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Smithwick v. State, 117 So. 3d 85 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)
    …f the very same order. See generally Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(m) (barring frivolous collateral criminal pleadings). We caution Smithwick that any future frivolous pro se pleadings might result in the imposition of sanctions. See, e.g., Oakley v. State, 21 So. 3d 76, 77 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (warning defendant that filing any additional successive and frivolous pro se petitions or appeals attacking his convictions and sentences would result in issuance of order to show cause why he should not be denied further ac…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw