CEDRIC WARREN
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 court may prohibit a pro se litigant from filing further pleadings regarding a specific case when the litigant has engaged in abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous filings.
[1] A litigant engaging in a pattern of abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filings attacking a judgment and sentence may be prohibited from filing future pro…
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 in justifying the prohibition on future pro se filings.
Cedric Warren, an inmate representing himself, filed multiple pro se pleadings attacking his judgment and sentence from a 2001 Volusia County criminal…
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 Abusive Litigation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Due to Petitioner’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filings attacking his judgment and sentence in Volusia County Circuit Court Case No. 2001-36396-CFAES, 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, 48 (Fla. 1999). Having received no response, we conclude that Petitioner is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.
Therefore, in order to conserve judicial resources, the Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning the above 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. (2023); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
FUTURE PRO SE FILINGS PROHIBITED.
EISNAUGLE, HARRIS 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)