WILLIE L. HINES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2013-04-24
No. 4D11-4894
WARNER, POLEN and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.
125 So. 3d 912 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2013)

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.

Synopsis

In this post-conviction relief appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's summary denial of Willie Hines's untimely and successive habeas corpus petition challenging his 1981 armed robbery conviction. The court also imposed sanctions barring Hines from filing pro se documents without bar counsel review due to his pattern of frivolous and abusive filings.


Holding

The court affirmed the trial court's summary denial of the untimely and successive post-conviction relief motion as procedurally barred, found all of Hines's arguments frivolous and without merit, and imposed sanctions prohibiting Hines from filing pro se documents unless reviewed and signed by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar.


Headnotes

[1] A criminal information need not charge aider/abettor liability.

[2] Untimely and successive motions for post-conviction relief are procedurally barred.

Previewing 2 of 6 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

Key Quotes

“The law is well settled that an information need not charge aider/abettor liability.”

Establishes why Hines's argument about defects in the information was frivolous.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Willie Hines was convicted in 1981 for armed robbery with a firearm. He filed an 'Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus' below, which was his f…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

PER CURIAM.

We previously affirmed the summary denial of appellant’s untimely and successive attempt at post-conviction relief. The “Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus” that appellant filed below again attempted to challenge his 1981 conviction for armed robbery with a firearm in the underlying case. The trial court correctly treated the petition as a motion for post-conviction relief under rule 3.850 and determined that the motion was untimely and procedurally barred. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(0; Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1241 (Fla.2004). Appellant’s attempt at raising alleged defects in the information is frivolous. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.140(o). The law is well settled that an information need not charge aider/abettor liability. State v. Roby, 246 So.2d 566, 571 (Fla.1971). The rambling petition and brief on appeal raise many other confused arguments that are equally devoid of merit and unworthy of discussion.

This appeal constitutes appellant’s fourteenth proceeding in this court. In case number 4D07-4621, this court admonished appellant that his continued filing of frivolous, repetitive, and abusive documents in this court would result in sanctions. Appellant has filed four more postconviction challenges and appeals since that warning.

Pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999), we issued an order directing appellant to show cause why this court should not impose the sanction of no longer accepting his pro se filings. In his response to this court, appellant repeats his frivolous arguments and suggests that this court is engaged in a conspiracy with the “Illuminati” and serving “Satan.” Appellant’s response convinces this court of the need to impose sanctions to prevent his abuse of post-conviction relief procedures. McCutcheon v. State, 44 So.3d 156, 161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).

Accordingly, the Clerk of this court is directed to no longer accept any paper filed by Willie Lee Hines unless the document has been reviewed and signed by a *914member in good standing of the Florida Bar. The Clerk is directed to forward a certified copy of this order to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary procedures, including forfeiture of gain time. § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2012).

Sanctions imposed.

WARNER, POLEN and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw