JASON T. DEATON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JASON T. DEATON, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
95 So. 3d 413
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2012)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
Affirmed. Appellant is cautioned against future filings which include challenges on those sentencing issues raised and rejected in his rule 3.800(a) motion, the denial of which we now affirm. Such filings may result in a show cause order and consideration of sanctions. See generally State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999).
MAY, C.J., GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lanadieal N. Ashe v. State, 106 So. 3d 956 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…e defendant has already received the ruling she now seeks, and correctly concluded the defendant should be barred from future pro se filings. We review an order prohibiting any further pro se filings for an abuse of discretion. See Hudson v. State, 95 So. 3d 413, 414 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). [*958] Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 allows criminal defendants to enter motions to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence, but limits the time to two years on most motions. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b). The rule a…
-
Brinson v. State, 215 So. 3d 1260 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…and to any ‘future case.’ ” A circuit court’s order prohibiting pro se filings by a defendant is reviewed by the appellate court under the abuse of discretion standard. Ashe v. State, 106 So. 3d 956, 957 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (citing Hudson v. State, 95 So. 3d 413, 414 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)). Initially, we find no abuse of discretion in the court barring Brinson from future pro se filings attacking his judgment, convictions, or sentence in Case No. CF06-1283, whether filed in that case or in any other case. How…
-
Davis v. State, 198 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…not be barred from filing further pro se pleadings. A trial court’s decision to sanction an incarcerated pro se litigant by barring him or her from submitting future pro se filings is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See, e.g., Hudson v. State, 95 So. 3d 413, 414 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“[T]he trial court did not abuse its discretion when it issued the sanction order barring further pro se filings.... ”). In Haag v. State, 591 So. 2d 614, 617 (Fla.1992), the Florida Supreme Court adopted the “mailbox rule…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)