JEFFREY POTTER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Jeffrey Potter appealed the trial court's denial of his rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an allegedly illegal sentence. The court affirmed the denial and imposed sanctions on Potter for abusing the postconviction process through numerous frivolous filings.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of Potter's rule 3.800(a) motion because Potter did not contest the offenses listed or demonstrate that his sentence is illegal. The court also imposed sanctions on Potter for abusing the postconviction process through repeated frivolous filings.
[1] A motion to correct an illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a) must demonstrate that the sentence is illegal as a result of missing information, not merely that prior offens…
[2] A defendant's prior filing of a motion contesting prior felony convictions referenced on a scoresheet, which was denied and affirmed on appeal, may preclude subsequent si…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“He does not contest the offenses listed or otherwise demonstrate that his sentence is illegal as a result of the missing information.”
Establishes the threshold for illegal sentence claims—the defendant must affirmatively demonstrate illegality, not merely contest details.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePotter was convicted and sentenced in 1991 in case number 90-13578. In his rule 3.800(a) motion, he challenged his scoresheet, arguing that prior offe…
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 Rule 3.800(A) cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. Appellant has filed numerous postconviction challenges and appeals in connection with lower tribunal case number 90-13578, and was previously warned by this court in case numbers 4D12-996 and 4D11-4868 that future frivolous filings may result in sanctions. Because of appellant’s ongoing abuse of the postconviction process, we issued an order to show cause pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999). Appellant has not responded. We conclude that sanctions are appropriate.
Within the rule 3.800(a) motion before us, appellant challenged his 1991 score-sheet, arguing that the prior offenses were not listed in requisite detail. He does not contest the offenses listed or otherwise demonstrate that his sentence is illegal as a result of the missing information. See Brooks v. State, 969 So.2d 238, 243 (Fla. 2007). Also, our records reflect that, in 1992, appellant filed a rule 3.800(a) motion contesting the prior felony convictions referenced on his scoresheet. This court affirmed the trial court’s denial of relief. See Potter v. State, 615 So.2d 169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).
This is appellant’s twelfth filing in this court, which filings include seven appeals from orders denying motions for rules 3.800(a) and 3.850 relief.1 We conclude that appellant’s abuse of the postconviction process interferes with the right of access to court for others and damages the remedy. See Lake v. State, 115 So.3d 1046, 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (citing McCutcheon v. State, 44 So.3d 156, 161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), review denied, 75 So.3d 1245 (Fla.2011)).
Accordingly, the Clerk of this Court is directed to no longer accept any paper filed by Jeffrey Potter arising out of his conviction and sentence in lower tribunal case number 90-13578, unless that paper has been signed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar and that member certifies that a good faith basis exists for each claim presented. Further, we direct the Clerk to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary procedures. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2012).
Affirmed. Sanctions imposed.
DAMOORGIAN, C.J., STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Brooks v. State, 969 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 2007)
- McCUTCHEON v. State, 44 So. 3d 156 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- Mager v. Garfinkel, 75 So. 3d 1245 (Fla. 2011)
- Lake v. State, 115 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)