DONALD OTIS WILLIAMS
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 files repetitive, frivolous, or abusive pleadings may be barred from further pro se filings to conserve judicial resources.
[1] A court may prohibit a pro se litigant from filing future pleadings when the litigant engages in abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous filings, based on the need t…
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.”
Court quoting Isley v. State when imposing the filing restriction.
Donald Otis Williams, representing himself, filed an apparent abuse of process petition for writ of certiorari attaching his judgment and sentence fro…
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 Sanctions For Frivolous Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This Court previously denied Petitioner’s petition for Writ of Certiorari. Due to Petitioner’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filing attaching his judgment and sentence in Lake County Fifth Judicial Circuit case number No. 2011-CF- 105, this Court issued an order directing Petitioner to show cause why he should not be prohibited from future pro se filings. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999). Petitioner’s response is insufficient and failed to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed. Therefore, we conclude that Petitioner is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.
In order to conserve judicial resources, Petitioner is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se pleadings concerning his conviction and sentence imposed in Lake County Fifth Judicial Circuit case number No. 2011-CF-105. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any filings concerning this case unless they are filed by a member in good standing with 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. (2022); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). SANCTIONS IMPOSED. PETITIONER PROHIBITED FROM FUTURE FILINGS.
WALLIS, EDWARDS and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)