LAZARO QUINTERO, 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.
Lazaro Quintero appeals a trial court order barring him from filing pro se pleadings in four criminal cases. The appellate court affirms the bar in three cases where Quintero filed numerous postconviction motions, but reverses as to one case where the record did not support a finding of abuse of the postconviction process.
The court affirmed the bar in cases 07-37983, 08-662, and 08-2880 where Quintero filed numerous postconviction motions, but reversed the bar in case 08-32265 because the record did not establish abuse of the postconviction process in that particular case, where Quintero filed only one premature motion and one proper motion to mitigate sentence.
[1] A trial court may bar a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings if the litigant has abused the judicial system.
[2] A litigant's filing of a premature postconviction motion does not, on its own, establish an abuse of the judicial system.
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“The record does not support the trial court's determination that Quintero abused the postconviction process in case number 08-32265.”
Establishes the court's primary holding that reversal was warranted for case 08-32265 because the limited filing history did not demonstrate abuse.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceQuintero was convicted of aggravated battery and simple battery in case number 08-32265 following a July 2015 jury trial and sentenced to fifteen year…
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 Abuse Of Judicial System cases and more on FLexlaw
Lazaro Quintero appeals from the trial court’s order barring Quintero from filing any further pro se pleadings or documents in four separate circuit court criminal cases.
We affirm the trial court’s order insofar as it bars appellant from filing any further pro se pleadings or documents in circuit court case numbers 07-37983, 08-662, and 08-2880. However, we reverse insofar as the order prohibits appellant from filing any further pro se pleadings or documents in circuit court case number 08-32265. It is true that Quintero filed a number of pro se posteonviction motions in case numbers 07-37983, 08-662 and 08-2880, and on appeal Quintero does not challenge the trial court’s order as regards those cases.1 As to *996case number 08-32265, however, the record and the relatively short postconviction history of the case establish that:
- On July 14, 2015, following a jury trial, Quintero was convicted of aggravated battery (Count I) and simple battery (Count II);
- On July 20, 2015 (prior to sentencing) Quintero filed a pro se motion for postconviction relief, which was later dismissed as premature;
- On July 31, 2015, the trial court sentenced Quintero to fifteen years prison on Count I and a consecutive 364 days in county jail on Count II;
- Following our affirmance of Quinte-ro’s direct appeal of 08-32265 (3D15-1836, mandate issued August 18, 2016), Quintero filed a timely and legally sufficient pro se motion to mitigate sentence pursuant to rule 3.800(c);
- The trial court exercised its discretion and denied the motion to mitigate on October 14, 2016.
Within the body of the order denying Quintero’s legally sufficient and timely filed motion to mitigate, the trial court concluded that “Mr. Quintero abused the judicial system by filing the instant motion.” The trial court directed Quintero to show .cause why he should not be barred from proceeding pro se in case number OS-32265. However, the record establishes that, as to this one case, Quintero filed only a premature motion for postconviction relief (the merits of which were not addressed) and a proper motion to mitigate sentence. The record does not support the trial court’s determination that Quintero abused the postconviction process in case number 08-32265. See, e.g., Garcia v. State, 212 So.3d 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017); Gaston v. State, 141 So.3d 627 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). We therefore reverse that portion of the order that prohibits Quintero from proceeding pro se in circuit court case number 08-32265. We affirm the trial court’s order in all other respects.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gaston v. State, 141 So. 3d 627 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Garcia v. State, 212 So. 3d 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)