SAMUEL RIVERA, 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.
Samuel Rivera, a prisoner convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery in 1987, filed a belated appeal nunc pro tunc motion after the trial court prohibited him from filing further pro se pleadings. The appellate court dismissed his motion as an impermissible attempt to appeal previously decided matters and issued an order to show cause why he should not be barred from all future pro se filings related to his case.
The court granted the State's motion to dismiss Rivera's belated appeal nunc pro tunc motion because it constituted an impermissible attempt to appeal matters already unsuccessfully appealed. The court also issued an order to show cause directing Rivera to demonstrate within forty-five days why he should not be prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other proceedings related to his case.
[1] A court may affirm a trial court's order denying a motion to correct sentence when the defendant's allegations have already been reviewed and disposed of by the appellate…
[2] An appellate court may issue an order to show cause why a party should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, petitions, motions, or other proceedings rela…
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“It appears that Rivera's purported belated appeal in the instant case is an effort to appeal not only Rivera's original conviction, but also the trial court's 2012 show cause order and the resulting prohibition order preventing Rivera from further pro se filings.”
Explains why the court dismissed the motion as an impermissible attempt to re-appeal previously decided matters.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1987, Rivera was convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment. His conviction was upheld on direct appeal,…
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 Gain Time Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw
On April 29, 2016, Appellant Samuel Rivera filed with this "Court a “Notice for Belated Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc Motion.” We grant Appellee State of Florida’s motion to dismiss this motion. We dismiss Rivera’s related May 26, 2017 “Motion to Deny the State Attorney General’s Motion tp Dismiss.” Further, we issue an order to show cause as. described below.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
In 1987, Rivera was convicted of first degree murder and armed robbery, His conviction, and life sentence on the- first degree murder count were upheld on direct appeal,' although his sentence for armed, robbery was reversed by this Court with an order to re-sentence Rivera on this count. Rivera v. State, 526 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). The trial court re-sentenced Rivera in 1989. Since then, Rivera has filed twelve post-conviction appeals and petitions with this Court.1 After Rivera filed similar motions and petitions in the circuit court, the circuit court issued a November. 2012 order requiring Rivera to show cause as to why Rivera should not be barred from filing future pro se pleadings. After Rivera filed a response, the trial court entered a December 21, 2012 order *402prohibiting Rivera from filing further pro se pleadings in lower court case number 85-25037.
It appears that Rivera’s purported belated appeal in the instant case is an effort to appeal not only Rivera’s original conviction, but also the trial court’s 2012 show cause order and the resulting prohibition order preventing Rivera from further pro se filings. Rivera has already unsuccessfully appealed the trial court’s 2012 show cause and sanctions orders,2 as well as his original conviction. We, therefore, grant the State’s motion and dismiss the instant case.
Further, Rivera is hereby directed to show cause, within forty-five days from the date of this order, 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 85-25037.
If Rivera does not demonstrate good cause, any such further and unauthorized filings by Rivera 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. (2015).
State’s motion granted; Rivera’s motion dismissed. Order to show cause issued.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Reyes v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
- Rivera v. State, 526 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Michl v. Gen. Elec. Co. & Gray Stores, Inc., 526 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Empire Seafood, Inc. v. P.Q. Beef Processors, Inc., 639 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Rivera v. State, 639 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)