DOUGLAS SINCLAIR, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA AND MICHAEL D. CREWS, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENTS
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.
Florida appellate court dismissed petitioner's repeated habeas corpus petition as unauthorized and warned of sanctions for frivolous filings after rejecting the same claim four times in one year.
A petition for writ of prohibition raising a claim previously rejected four times is dismissed as unauthorized, and the petitioner is warned of potential sanctions for future frivolous filings.
[1] Repeated filing of the same claim previously rejected by the appellate court may result in sanctions including prohibition on future pro se filings and referral to the De…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner Sinclair filed a petition for writ of prohibition raising a claim that had been brought before the court repeatedly and rejected at least 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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Pro Se Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
The petition for writ of prohibition is treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, and is dismissed as unauthorized. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla.2004). As we have recognized previously, the petitioner has brought the claim raised herein before this court repeatedly, and it has been considered and rejected by this court at least four times over the past year alone.1 Accordingly, we direct the clerk of the court to forward a copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution with the Department of Corrections for consideration of disciplinary measures against the petitioner pursuant to section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes.
The petitioner is warned that any future frivolous filings in this court may result in the imposition of additional sanctions, including but not limited to a prohibition on any further pro se filings relating to the sentence imposed in Duval County Circuit Court case number 16-2000-CF-9964-AXXX.
THOMAS, MARSTILLER, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sinclair v. State, 199 So. 3d 374 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…ised on direct appeal or in postconviction motions). Sinclair has raised this same argument at least five times in this court, and each time has failed to obtain relief. See Sinclair v. State, 134 So. 3d 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Sinclair v. State, 132 So. 3d 903 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Sinclair v. State, 147 So. 3d 33 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Sinclair v. State, 118 So. 3d 810 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); Sinclair v. State, 114 So. 3d 943 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). The last time he raised this argument, we warned him that future…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)