LEONARDO T. MORALES, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., REPONDENTS
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.
Leonardo Morales petitions for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his life sentence imposed in 1993 following resentencing ordered by the appellate court. The court denies the petition and issues an order to show cause why Morales should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals related to his criminal sentencing, citing his pattern of repetitive filings raising identical arguments over twenty-two years.
The court denies Morales's petition for habeas corpus and issues an order to show cause why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, motions, or petitions related to his criminal sentencing. The court finds that Morales has repeatedly raised the same arguments in nearly identical language in multiple prior filings.
[1] A motion to correct an illegal sentence under Rule 3.800(a) is not the proper vehicle to challenge scoresheet errors that require an evidentiary hearing to resolve.
[2] A defendant challenging the legality of a sentence based on scoresheet errors must demonstrate that the face of the record clearly shows the sentence could not have been…
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“It is this sentence, twenty-two years and many petitions and appeals later, that brings Morales again to the attention of this Court.”
Illustrates the protracted nature of Morales's repetitive litigation over his 1993 sentence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1986, Morales was convicted by jury of burglary of an occupied dwelling with assault without a weapon and sexual battery without a weapon. The tria…
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
Leonard T. Morales petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of his sentence of life imprisonment. For the reasons stated below, we deny Morales’s instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus and order Morales to show cause why this Court should not prohibit Morales from making further pro se filings in circuit court case 85-3768.
In 1986, a jury found Morales guilty of: (1) burglary of an occupied dwelling with an assault without a weapon, and (2) sexual battery without a weapon.
For procedural reasons, this Court reversed and remanded for resentencing. Morales v. State, 563 So.2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (Mem). Subsequently, this Court approved the trial court’s original sentence. Morales v. State, 580 So.2d 787 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (Mem). Due to an evolving view of departure orders by the Florida Supreme Court,1 this Court remanded for resentencing again. Morales v. State, 613 So.2d 922 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).
Thus, on May 21, 1993, the trial court re-sentenced Morales. Under a revised scoresheet, the trial court again imposed upon Morales a sentence of life imprisonment. It is this sentence, twenty-two years and many petitions and appeals later, that brings Morales again to the attention of this Court. Morales argues on behalf of his numerous filings that his confinement is a “manifest injustice.”
This Court has given its attention several times in recent years to Morales on the exact issue raised in his current petition. See Morales v. State, 3D14-996 (Fla. 3d DCA May 8, 2014); Morales v. State, 106 So.3d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (Table); Morales v. State, 73 So.3d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (Table). In each of these cases, Morales petitioned for review of the scoresheet- calculation in almost identical language that he employs in his current petition for writ of habeas corpus.2 •
*470ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Morales is hereby directed to show cause, within forty-five days from the date of this opinion, why he should not be prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other proceedings related to his criminal sentencing in circuit court case number 85-3768.
If Morales does not demonstrate good cause, any such further and unauthorized filings by Morales will subject him to appropriate sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Florida Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action, including forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2014).
Petition denied. Order to show cause issued.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (12 total)
- Rhoda Smith v. State, 598 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1992)
- Morales v. State, 613 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Moliver v. Avianca, Inc., 580 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Morales v. State, 842 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Morales v. State, 563 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Lindeman v. State, 563 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Morales v. State, 638 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Univision Holdings, Inc. v. Ramos, 638 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Henderson v. State, 741 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Morales v. Singletary, 741 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)