DONALD A. WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Donald A. Williams appealed the denial of his Rule 3.800 motion to correct an illegal sentence. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's denial and issued an order to show cause why Williams should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals related to his sentencing, given his pattern of successive post-conviction filings.
The court affirmed the denial of the Rule 3.800 motion and issued an order to show cause requiring Williams to demonstrate good cause within thirty days why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, petitions, motions, or other proceedings related to his sentencing in the three identified circuit court cases.
[1] A successive appeal of a denial of a motion to correct an illegal sentence is affirmed.
[2] A court may order a pro se litigant to show cause why they should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, petitions, motions, or other proceedings related t…
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“We must balance Mr. Williams' pro se right of access to courts with the Court's need to devote its finite resources to legitimate appeals, recognizing the seriousness of the sanction when the litigant is a criminal defendant.”
Establishes the court's framework for deciding whether to restrict Williams' future filings, balancing access to courts against judicial efficiency.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliams filed a Rule 3.800 motion to correct an illegal sentence in the trial court, which was denied. He has filed multiple pro se post-conviction a…
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 Access To Courts cases and more on FLexlaw
Following review of Donald A. Williams’ appeal of the denial of his 3.800 motion to correct illegal sentence, it is ordered that said appeal is successive and is hereby affirmed.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Furthermore, as it appears that Mr. Williams has submitted multiple pro se post-conviction appeals in connection with his sentence in circuit court case numbers *669F89-6716, F88-25515 and F88-25518,1 we order Mr. Williams to show good cause within thirty (30) days why he should not be prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other proceedings related to his criminal sentencing in those circuit court cases.
We note that in Williams v. State, 106 So.3d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) this Court issued an Order precluding Mr. Williams from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, petitions or other papers relating to his conviction in lower tribunal case number 02-37491(B). We further note that Mr. Williams had filed 13 pro se appeals in connection with that lower tribunal number and that his appeals relating to the case numbers pertinent to this matter appear to have commenced shortly after this Court issued its Order relating to his other case number.
We must balance Mr. Williams’ pro se right of access to courts with the Court’s need to devote its finite resources to legitimate appeals, recognizing the seriousness of the sanction when the litigant is a criminal defendant. State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47, 48 (Fla.1999). After this order to show cause and giving Mr. Williams an opportunity to respond, this Court may prevent such further filings. See id. Finally, we hereby notify Mr. Williams that if he fails to show adequate cause to prevent the issuance of such an order, we will direct the Clerk to forward a certified copy of this Court’s opinion to the Department of Corrections for consideration by that institution of disciplinary measures against Mr. Williams pursuant to sections 944.279(1) and 944.28(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2007).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Williams v. State, 106 So. 3d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ballard, 163 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
- Williams v. State, 163 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)