FRANK OWENS, 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.
Frank Owens, a convicted felon who has filed numerous frivolous appeals and postconviction motions over a decade, was prohibited from filing further pro se pleadings related to his 2006 convictions without attorney review and signature. The court invoked its "enough is enough" rule to sanction repeated abuse of the judicial system.
Owens is precluded from filing any additional pro se appeals, motions, pleadings, or petitions pertaining to his convictions and sentences without the review and signature of an attorney licensed to practice law in Florida. The clerk of court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings from Owens relating to the case.
[1] A party who repeatedly abuses the judicial system with frivolous filings may be prohibited from filing further pro se pleadings.
[2] A court may order that future pro se filings by a party pertaining to specific convictions and sentences must be reviewed and signed by a licensed attorney.
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“because Owens has repeatedly abused the judicial system with his frequent, frivolous filings, we conclude that he qualifies for this court's "enough is enough" rule”
Establishes the basis for imposing the pro se filing restriction based on pattern of frivolous litigation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOwens was convicted in 2006 of two counts of attempted aggravated assault with a firearm, one count of battery, and one count of tampering with a witn…
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 Litigant Restrictions cases and more on FLexlaw
ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
In 2006, following a jury trial, Frank Owens was adjudicated guilty of two counts of attempted aggravated assault with a firearm, one count of battery, and one count of tampering with a witness. On direct appeal, this court affirmed the convictions and sentences without opinion. Owens v. State, 970 So.2d 846 (Fla. 5th DCA2007).
Subsequent to his unsuccessful direct appeal, Owens has filed numerous petitions with this court, which were either denied or dismissed, as well as several postconviction motions with the circuit court, which were denied, and those denials were af*931firmed by this court on appeal.1 We recently affirmed, without opinion, Owens’ latest appeal of the lower court’s denial of a postconviction motion to correct an illegal sentence. Owens v. State, No. 5D16-650, 2016 WL 1071413 (Fla. 5th DCA March 15, 2016). We also contemporaneously issued an order directing Owens to show cause why he should not be prohibited from filing any appeal, petition, pleading, or motion pertaining to the convictions and sentences rendered in Orange County Circuit court Case No. 2005-CF-017072-A-O, unless reviewed and signed by an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. See State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999).
Owens filed a response, which this court has now reviewed. We find no merit to the response, and, because Owens has repeatedly abused the judicial system with his frequent, frivolous filings, we conclude that he qualifies for this court’s “enough is enough” rule. See Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409, 410-11 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). Accordingly, we hold that Owens is precluded from filing any additional appeals, motions, pleadings, or petitions pertaining to his convictions, judgments and sentences in Case No. 2005-CF-017072-A-O, Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, Orange County, Florida, unless reviewed and signed by an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. The clerk of court is directed not to accept from Owens, as a petitioner or appellant, any further pro se pleadings or filings relating to that case. See Medberry v. State, 824 So.2d 1058, 1059 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
FUTURE PRO SE FILINGS ARE PROHIBITED.
SAWAYA, PALMER, and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Medberry v. State, 824 So. 2d 1058 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Owens v. State, 177 So. 3d 1277 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)