KELVIN FRAZIER, PETITIONER,
v.
WALTER A. MCNEIL, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 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.
Kelvin Frazier, an inmate, sought a writ of mandamus to compel a circuit court to process his habeas corpus petition, but the appellate court denied relief and imposed sanctions against him for serial frivolous litigation, requiring him to obtain counsel for future filings or face dismissal of his cases.
The court denied the mandamus petition because the clerk properly followed the existing sanction order from the circuit court. The court also imposed sanctions on Frazier, requiring him to secure representation by a Florida Bar member for any active cases within 10 days or face dismissal, and prohibiting the clerk from accepting further pro se filings from him.
[1] A clerk of court may properly act in accordance with a prior sanction order prohibiting a litigant from appearing in civil actions unless filing fees are paid and counsel…
[2] A court may impose sanctions against a party who has a history of filing numerous unsuccessful appeals and petitions, particularly when those cases were dismissed for non…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Because that sanction order was not successfully challenged by Frazier, the clerk properly acted in accordance with it, and we therefore denied the petition.”
Establishes the basis for denying the mandamus petition—the prior sanction order was valid and properly followed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFrazier filed a mandamus petition seeking to compel the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County to file and act on a habeas corpus petition. A circuit cou…
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 Florida Rules Of Appellate Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS
Kelvin Frazier petitioned this court for a writ of mandamus, asking this court to compel the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County to file and take action on a habeas corpus petition he filed there. Previously, a judge of that court had entered an order prohibiting Frazier from appearing in civil actions in that court unless he paid any applicable filing fee and was represented by counsel. Because that sanction order was not successfully challenged by Frazier, the clerk properly acted in accordance with it, and we therefore denied the petition. Frazier v. McNeil, 23 So.3d 714 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
Further, on this court’s own motion, a show cause order issued to petitioner as to why a similar sanction should not be imposed against him by this court. Since 2003, Frazier has filed 17 appeals and petitions, obtaining relief only on a filing fee issue in Frazier v. McDonough, 950 So.2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). His other cases were either dismissed for failure to comply with the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure or orders of this court, or were found to be without merit. Having considered his response to the show cause order, we elect to impose sanctions against petitioner. See Lee v. Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 873 So.2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Attwood v. Eighth Circuit Court, 667 So.2d 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). It is hereby ordered that Kelvin Frazier shall secure the filing of a notice of appearance by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar in any active case now pending before this court in which he appears as appellant or petitioner within 10 days of date of this order, failing which such cases shall be dismissed. Further, the clerk of this court is directed to accept no further pro se filings from Frazier; if received, they shall be returned to him without filing and with a reference to this opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
KAHN, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Frazier v. McNEIL, 46 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
Authorities Cited
- Attwood v. Eighth Cir. Court, 667 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- LEE v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 873 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Frazier v. McDONOUGH, 950 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Frazier v. McNEIL, 46 So. 3d 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)