CHESTER R. MURNAHAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2015-08-14
No. 5D15-1670
Lawson, C.J., Palmer, J., Torpy, J.
172 So. 3d 549 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2015)

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

The court barred a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings in a specific criminal case after he failed to respond to a show-cause order, finding abuse of the judicial process.


Holding

A pro se litigant who abuses the judicial process by filing repetitive challenges to a conviction may be barred from filing further pro se pleadings in that case.


Headnotes

[1] A pro se litigant who abuses the judicial process by filing repetitive challenges to a conviction may be barred from filing further pro se pleadings in that specific case…

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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Chester R. Murnahan filed multiple pro se challenges to his 1999 conviction in Orange County Circuit Court Case Number 1999-CF-10926-B-0. The court is…

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.

PER CURIAM.

ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

This court issued a Spencer 1 show-cause order directing appellant, Chester R. Mur-nahan, to demonstrate why he should not be barred from filing further pro se challenges to his convictions and sentences in Orange County, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court Case Number 1999-CF-10926-B-0. Murnahan failed to file a response. As such, we conclude that, since Murnahan is abusing the judicial process, he must be barred from filing any further pro se pleadings.

Accordingly, Murnahan is prohibited from filing with this court any further pro se pleadings concerning Orange County, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, case number 1999-CF-10926-B-0. The Clerk of this court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings from Murnahan concerning this case. Any additional pleadings or motions related to this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk unless they are filed by a member in good standing with The Florida Bar. See Johnson v. State, 652 So.2d 980, 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). The Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary procedures. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2014); Simpkins v. State, 909 So.2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). Rehearing will not be entertained.

Future pro se filings PROHIBITED.

LAWSON, C.J., PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw