ANTUAN R. GOLDEN

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2019-07-10

No. 19-0794

Marianne L. Aho, J., B.L. Thomas, J., Wetherell, J., M.K. Thomas, J.

275 So. 3d 262 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2019)

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.

Synopsis

The court affirmed the denial of Golden's successive rule 3.800 motion challenging his habitual felony offender designation, finding the appeal frivolous because it raised an identical claim previously decided on the merits.

Holding

A successive rule 3.800 motion raising the same issue as a prior motion that was denied on the merits and affirmed on appeal is frivolous and barred by collateral estoppel.

Headnotes

[1] Collateral estoppel precludes a defendant from rearguing in a successive rule 3.800 motion the same issue raised and rejected in a prior postconviction motion.

[2] A successive postconviction filing raising an identical claim previously litigated and affirmed on appeal constitutes a frivolous appeal and abuse of process subject to p…

Previewing 2 of 2 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

Key Quotes

“Collateral estoppel . . . precludes a defendant from rearguing in a successive rule 3.800 motion the same issue argued in a prior motion.”
Court citing State v. McBride for the principle that successive motions raising identical claims are barred.

Facts & Procedural History

Antuan R. Golden filed a rule 3.800 motion challenging the legality of his habitual felony offender designation. This was his second such motion raisi…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Rule 3.800 Motion Successive Motions Habitual Felony Offender Abuse Of Process

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.800 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm without discussion the denial of Appellant’s rule 3.800 motion challenging the legality of his habitual felony offender designation. Additionally, because the claim raised by Appellant in this motion is exactly the same as the as the claim he raised in a prior rule 3.800 motion that was denied on the merits and affirmed on appeal,¹ we find this appeal to be frivolous and an abuse of process. See State v. McBride, 848 So. 2d 287, 291 (Fla. 2003) (“Collateral estoppel . . . precludes a defendant from rearguing in a successive rule 3.800 motion the same issue argued

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________

Antuan R. Golden, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Footnotes

1 Golden v. State, Case No.1D16-4420, 229 So. 3d 1224 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (table). in a prior motion.”); Carroll v. State, 192 So. 3d 525, 526-27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (“The postconviction process does not exist simply to give prisoners something to do in order to help them pass the time as they serve their sentences, and every minute the courts are required to spend on meritless postconviction filings is time that cannot be spent on other potentially meritorious cases.”). Accordingly, we direct the Clerk to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution within the Department of Corrections for potential disciplinary action against Appellant pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes, and the Department’s rules. See Ponton v. Willis, 172 So. 3d 574, 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (explaining that a Spencer order is not required before referring the inmate for disciplinary action based upon a frivolous filing).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

State v. Antoine L. McBRIDE, 848 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2003)
Ponton v. Warden John Willis, 172 So. 3d 574 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
Marc v. Miller, 172 So. 3d 574 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
Carroll v. State, 192 So. 3d 525 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
Golden v. State, 229 So. 3d 1224 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)
Guerrero v. State, 229 So. 3d 1224 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw