ALFONSO PONTON, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, REPONDENT
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.
Alfonso Ponton, a pro se litigant, petitioned for writs of mandamus and habeas corpus challenging a circuit court's order prohibiting him from filing further pro se pleadings in three long-closed criminal cases. The Third District Court of Appeal dismissed both petitions, reaffirmed its 2002 prohibition on Ponton's pro se filings in these cases, and imposed sanctions for abuse of the post-conviction process.
Both petitions are dismissed. The court reaffirmed its 2002 prohibition preventing Ponton from filing additional pro se appeals, motions, and petitions relating to the three specified lower tribunal cases, finding that Ponton abused the post-conviction process and filed frivolous appeals.
[1] A court may prohibit a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings in specific cases when the litigant has repeatedly abused the judicial process by filing frivolous an…
[2] A court may direct its clerk not to accept further pro se filings from a litigant who has contravened a prior court order prohibiting such filings.
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“On October 16, 2002, this court prohibited Ponton 'from filing any additional pro se appeals, including pleadings, motions, and petitions relating to any issue in Lower Tribunal cases F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758.'”
Establishes the prior prohibition order that Ponton violated by continuing to file pro se pleadings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePonton had filed at least thirty-eight post-conviction motions and petitions in state court relating to three lower tribunal cases (F81-27294, F81-280…
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 Gain Time Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw
In appellate case number 3D14-1028, Alfonso Ponton, acting pro se, petitions this court for a writ of mandamus with respect to the circuit court’s order directing the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida not to accept any further pro se pleadings from Ponton in lower tribunal cases F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758.1
In appellate case number 3D14-2438, Ponton, acting pro se, petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus arguing his appellate counsel rendered him ineffective assistance in handling the appeal of his judgment and conviction in lower tribunal cases F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758.
We consolidate Ponton’s petitions under appellate case number 3D14-1028, and dismiss both petitions.
On October 16, 2002, this court prohibited Ponton “from filing any additional pro se appeals, including pleadings, motions, and petitions relating to any issue in Lower Tribunal cases F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758.” See Ponton v. State, 837 So.2d 435, 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). As of October 16, 2002, Ponton had filed at least thirty-eight post-conviction motions and petitions in state court alone; all of which were unsuccessful.
In contravention of our prohibition in 2002, Ponton continued to file unsuccessful pro se appeals and petitions relating to the above-mentioned lower tribunal cases. See Ponton v. State, 117 So.3d 1100 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (denying petition for writ of mandamus); Ponton v. State, 982 So.2d 698 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (affirming post-conviction appeal); Ponton v. State, 972 So.2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (affirming post-conviction appeal).
Additionally, on December 12, 2013, Ponton filed the instant pro se petition for writ of mandamus. And, on October 9, 2014, Ponton filed the instant pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. There comes a point when “enough is enough.” Philpot v. State, — So.3d - (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (quoting Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409, 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)).
As such, the clerk is directed not to accept further pro se appeals, including pleadings, motions, and petitions from Ponton relating to lower tribunal numbers F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758. Because Ponton has abused the post-conviction process and filed frivolous appeals and petitions in this court, we direct the *426clerk of this court to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures, which may include forfeiture of gain-time. § 944.28(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2014).
Petition for writ of mandamus dismissed.
Petition for writ of habeas corpus dismissed.
Sanctions entered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ponton v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 891 F.3d 950 (11th Cir. 2018)…DCA 1983). After those convictions became final, Ponton launched a barrage of pro se post-conviction pleadings in state and federal court. He has filed at least 40 post-conviction motions and petitions in state court alone. See Ponton v. State, 155 So. 3d 425, 425 (Fla. 2014). Beginning in 1984, he filed his first of over a dozen pro se pleadings in federal district court. His first four federal pleadings-a mixed habeas corpus petition and civil rights action filed in 1984, a civil rights action filed…
Authorities Cited
- Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Harvard v. Singletary, 733 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 1999)
- Luis v. State, 982 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Kapua, 972 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Alfonzo D. Ponton v. State, 837 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)