JERMAINE LERONE GREENE
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.
A pro se litigant who engages in repetitive, frivolous filings may be barred from filing further pro se pleadings in the appellate court and required to retain counsel for any future filings regarding the same case.
[1] A pro se litigant engaged in a pattern of repetitive, frivolous, or malicious filings concerning the same criminal case may be barred from filing further pro se pleadings…
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 intelligence“Enough is enough.”
The court cited this phrase from Isley v. State when imposing the bar on pro se filings.
Jermaine Lerone Greene filed numerous pro se petitions and pleadings in the Fifth District Court of Appeal concerning his convictions and sentences in…
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 Legal Process cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 5D2026-1714 LT Case No. 35-2013-CF-2220-A
JERMAINE LERONE GREENE, Appellant,
V.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, A Case of Original Jurisdiction.
Jermaine Lerone Greene, Punta Gorda, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee.
September 10, 2026
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner's apparent abuse of the legal process by his repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filings that have been denied or dismissed by this Court on numerous occasions regarding his judgments and sentences imposed in Lake County Case No. 35-2013-CF-2220-A, resulted in Petitioner being cautioned that any further pro se filings in this Court asserting claims stemming from the identified case number may result in sanctions. He was also ordered 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 this Lake
County Case No. 35-2013-CF-2220-A unless reviewed and signed by an attorney licensed to practice in the State of Florida. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2025); State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999). Having carefully considered Petitioner's continued abuse of the legal process in his repetitive filings, and the lack of a response to said order to show cause, we conclude that Petitioner is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.
Therefore, to conserve judicial resources, Petitioner is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se filings concerning the above referenced case. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning this referenced case. Any future filings regarding the referenced case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk, unless filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. See Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“Enough is enough.”). The Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary proceedings. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2018); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
PETITIONER BARRED from further pro se filings.
MAKAR, BOATWRIGHT, and KILBANE, 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)
- Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)