DONALD A. WILLIAMS, PETITIONER,
v.
THE 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.
Donald Williams sought a writ of habeas corpus challenging his convictions for armed burglary, armed robbery, armed kidnapping, aggravated battery, and felon in possession of a firearm, arguing that two aggravated battery convictions violated double jeopardy. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal denied the petition and imposed a sanction prohibiting Williams from filing further pro se pleadings regarding this case.
The court held that the double jeopardy claim lacks merit because a defendant may be convicted and sentenced separately and consecutively for each distinct offense committed within a single criminal episode under Florida Statute section 775.021(4). Additionally, the court prohibited Williams from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to his convictions and sentences unless filed by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing, based on his pattern of frivolous and repetitive filings.
[1] A petition for writ of habeas corpus may be used where manifest injustice has occurred.
[2] A defendant may be convicted and sentenced separately and consecutively for each distinct offense committed within a single criminal episode, pursuant to section 775.021(…
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“a defendant may be convicted and sentenced separately and consecutively for each distinct offense committed within a single criminal episode”
Establishes the legal standard supporting rejection of Williams's double jeopardy claim regarding two separate aggravated battery convictions against different victims
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliams was convicted in 2005 of armed burglary, five counts of armed robbery, armed kidnapping, two counts of aggravated battery, and possession of …
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 Frivolous Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
The petitioner, Donald A. Williams, filed an emergency petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking his immediate release from state prison, where he is serving several consecutive life sentences as well as consecutive thirty and fifteen-year sentences imposed after a jury trial in 2005. In response to the petition and in light of his numerous and frivolous filings following his direct appeal, this Court ordered Williams to show cause why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se pleadings with this Court concerning his convictions and sentences stemming from lower tribunal case number 02-37491(B). After carefully considering the merits of Williams’s petition and his response to the show cause order, we deny the petition and now prohibit Williams from filing any additional pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to lower tribunal case number 02-37491-B in this Court unless filed by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing.
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Williams was charged with and convicted of committing armed burglary, five counts of armed robbery, armed kidnapping, two counts of aggravated battery, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. During the commission of each of these offenses, Williams was armed -with a firearm and wore a mask. On October 18, *9662006, this Court affirmed the judgment and sentences imposed, Williams v. State, 941 So.2d 386 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), and on November 17, 2006, this Court issued its mandate.
In this latest petition for writ of habeas corpus, Williams alleges, as he has previously and unsuccessfully alleged, that his convictions for aggravated battery violate double jeopardy. Although we recognize that habeas corpus may be used where manifest injustice has occurred, see Adams v. State, 957 So.2d 1183, 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), no manifest injustice has occurred in the instant case. Williams was convicted and sentenced for two separate aggravated batteries committed against two separate victims during an armed robbery at a restaurant in Miami-Dade County. Pursuant to section 775.021(4), Florida Statutes (2008), a defendant may be convicted and sentenced separately and consecutively for each distinct offense committed within a single criminal episode. Thus, Williams’s argument is without merit, and we deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Since this Court issued its mandate in 2006 on Williams’s direct appeal, he has filed at least thirteen postconviction petitions and appeals in this Court, which were denied, dismissed, or affirmed.1 Based on the volume of Williams’s repetitive and frivolous postconviction appearances before this Court, we issued an Order to Show Cause directing Williams to show good cause why he should not be prohibited from submitting further pro se filings with this Court concerning lower tribunal case number 02-37491(B). Having reviewed Williams’s response, filed on December 6, 2012, and his filings in this case, we conclude good cause has not been shown. Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of the Third District Court of Appeal to refuse to accept for filing in this Court any further appeals, pleading, motions, petitions, or other papers relating to Williams’s convictions and sentences in lower tribunal case number 02-37491(B) unless they are filed by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing.
Petition denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams v. Crews, 136 So. 3d 1119 (Fla. 2014)…d numerous pro se filings in this and other courts. Williams’ substantial filing history in the courts below has resulted in him being barred from filing any further pro se filings in both the circuit court and the district court. Williams v. State, 106 So. 3d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Order Prohibiting the Defendant From Filing Any Further Postconviction Motions Without the Approval and Signature of an Attorney Licensed in the State of Florida, State v. Williams, No. F02-37491B (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Apr. 7, 2009…
-
Reese v. State, 274 So. 3d 527 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)…victim attacked by her co- defendant for which Reese was convicted as a principal. It is axiomatic that multiple battery convictions—whether simple or aggravated—are legally permissible where multiple victims are battered. See Williams v. State, 106 So. 3d 964, 966 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Accordingly, Reese cannot show deficient performance in her counsel’s failure to argue that her dual battery convictions violate double jeopardy. See Teffeteller v. Duggar, 734 So. 2d 1009, 1023 (Fla. 1999) (“Trial counsel…
-
Williams v. State, 201 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…hin thirty (30) days why he should not be prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other proceedings related to his criminal sentencing in those circuit court cases. We note that in Williams v. State, 106 So. 3d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) this Court issued an Order precluding Mr. Williams from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, petitions or other papers relating to his conviction in lower tribunal case number 02-37491(B). We further note that Mr…
Authorities Cited
- Adams v. State, 957 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Williams v. State, 967 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- Kendrick Demonte Edwards v. State, 967 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- Williams v. State, 990 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)