CHEY WILLIAMS
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2021-12-22
No. 21-1958
Graci, Olszewski, Stevens
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2021)

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.


Holding

A pro se appellant who has previously been barred from filing pro se motions, fails to timely respond to an order to show cause, and has a history of filing successive meritless appeals may be permanently enjoined from filing further pro se pleadings and must use counsel.


Headnotes

[1] A letter from a clerk of court advising a party of a prohibition on filing pro se pleadings is not an appealable order.

[2] A court may dismiss an appeal as untimely when a party fails to respond to an order to show cause within the prescribed timeframe.

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

Key Quotes

“Williams has engaged in the filing of meritless, frivolous, and successive claims, continuing to seek relief from this Court notwithstanding prior adverse determinations on the merits.”

Court's reasoning for imposing pro se filing restrictions

Facts & Procedural History

Chey Williams, proceeding pro se, attempted to appeal a trial court order refusing to accept his motion because he had been previously barred from fil…

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.


Opinion of the Court

Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed December 22, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-1958 Lower Tribunal No. F90-49006

________________

Chey Williams,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Zachary James, Judge. Chey Williams, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and EMAS, and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.

ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On November 2, 2021, the Court ordered Chey Williams to show cause why his appeal of a trial court disposition refusing to accept his motion because he was previously barred from filing pro se motions should not be dismissed as untimely. In that order we also ordered Williams to show cause why he should not be precluded from filing further pro se pleadings, motions and papers in this court relating to lower tribunal case number F90-49006. When Williams failed to respond to our order within 10 days, we dismissed his appeal. On December 3, 2021, Williams filed his response to our order. The response was placed in the hands of prison officials for mailing on November 19, 2021. The order that Williams seeks to appeal is nothing more than a letter from the clerk of the lower court advising Williams that he was prohibited from filing pro se pleadings on August 11, 2009. Williams was also advised, by court order entered on January 6, 2015, that he had been previously barred from filing pro se motions and the motion that he had recently filed was stricken. The document that Williams seeks to appeal is not an appealable order; therefore, the appeal remains dismissed as previously ordered by this court. The trial court bar order was appealed in case number 3D09-2370, and the order was affirmed by this court. Upon consideration of Williams’ response to the order to show cause and the successive, duplicative, pro se petitions and appeals brought by Williams, we conclude that good cause has not been shown. Williams has engaged in the filing of meritless, frivolous, and successive claims, continuing to seek relief from this Court notwithstanding prior adverse determinations on the merits.1 In accordance with State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999), and Concepcion v. State, 944 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), Williams is prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to his conviction, judgment, and sentence in lower tribunal case F90-49006. We direct the Clerk of the Third District Court of Appeal to refuse to accept any such papers relating to the relevant circuit court case number unless they have been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a duly licensed member of The Florida Bar in good standing. See Whipple v. State, 112 So. 3d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Additionally, any such further and unauthorized pro se filings by Williams may subject him to appropriate sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the

Footnotes
1 Williams’ prior appeals and petitions include 3D91-1980, 93-2542, 94- 1126, 94-1989, 95-787, 95-3458, 00-2534, 03-934, 05-1213, 08-150, 09- 2370, and 16-1896. Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action, including the forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2017).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw