DAVID CHARLES SUSSMAN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
The court affirmed the denial of postconviction motions and warned that continued frivolous pro se filings may result in sanctions including a bar on future pro se filings.
[1] A court may impose sanctions, including a bar on pro se filing, against a litigant who engages in abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous filings.
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 intelligenceDavid Charles Sussman, proceeding pro se, appealed an order denying his postconviction motions in a case originating from Volusia County Circuit Court…
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 Rule 3.850 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________ Case No. 5D2024-3343 LT Case No. 2001-36686-CFAES _____________________________ DAVID CHARLES SUSSMAN, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________ 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. Elizabeth Ann Blackburn, Judge. David Charles Sussman, Arcadia, pro se. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. August 15, 2025
PER CURIAM.
David Charles Sussman (“Appellant”) pro se appeals an order denying his postconviction motions. We affirm this order without further discussion. This Court has previously reviewed and ruled upon multiple meritless and duplicative filings of Appellant stemming from this same case. Because it appears that Appellant’s filings are abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous, Appellant is cautioned that any further pro se filings in this Court asserting claims stemming from
2 Volusia County Circuit Court Case No. 2001-36686-CFAES may result in sanctions such as a bar on pro se filing in this Court. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999); Lavender v. State, 6 So. 3d 713, 714 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009). AFFIRMED; APPELLANT CAUTIONED. WALLIS, LAMBERT, and KILBANE, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________