BAITY
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.
Baity appealed an order denying his third rule 3.850 motion challenging his 1995 judgment and sentence. The court affirmed the denial, finding the appeal frivolous and referring Baity to the Department of Corrections for sanctions.
The court affirmed the order denying Baity's rule 3.850 motion, finding the appeal frivolous. The court referred Baity to the Department of Corrections for disciplinary sanctions and warned that future frivolous filings may result in prohibition of pro se access to the court.
[1] A court may refer an inmate to the Department of Corrections for disciplinary sanctions based on a frivolous filing without first issuing a show cause order pursuant to State v. …
[2] Repetitious collateral attacks on the same conviction across multiple filings, where the inmate has had prior opportunities to litigate the claims, constitute frivolous a…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBaity has filed five separate collateral attacks on his 1995 judgment and sentence, including three rule 3.850 motions before this court. This is his …
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 Pro Se Litigant Access To Courts cases and more on FLexlaw
at trial or, if properly preserved, on direct appeal of the judgment and sentence, or (3) would be considered a second or successive motion under rule 3.850 . . . .”).
This is Baity’s third time bringing the same claim before this court, and it is his fifth filing in which he has sought to collaterally attack his 1995 judgment and sentence. See Baity v. State, 770 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (reversing an order denying a rule 3.850 motion, and remanding for appointment of counsel and a new evidentiary hearing); Baity v. State, 842 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (affirming an order denying a rule 3.850 motion); Baity v. State, Case No. 1D01-4939 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 6, 2002) (order dismissing appeal as duplicative); Baity v. State, 265 So. 3d 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (affirming an order denying a rule 3.850 motion).
The court finds that this appeal is frivolous and refers Baity to the Department of Corrections for sanctions. See § 944.279, Fla. Stat. (2023) (providing that “[a] prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal . . . is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections”); Ponton v. Willis, 172 So. 3d 574, 576 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (explaining that a Spencer order is not required before a court may refer an inmate for disciplinary action under the statute based on a frivolous filing).
The court warns Baity that any future filings that this court determines to be frivolous or malicious may result in the imposition of further sanctions, including a prohibition against any future pro se filings in this court. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 49 (Fla. 1999) (holding that a court may deny a petitioner’s pro se access to that court, after the petitioner fails to show cause pursuant to a show cause order, where the petitioner has filed repetitious and frivolous pleadings that diminish the court’s ability to devote its finite resources to legitimate claims).
AFFIRMED.
OSTERHAUS, C.J., and ROWE and ROBERTS, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ David Baity, pro se, Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Crosley A. Green v. State, 975 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 2008)
- Ponton v. Warden John Willis, 172 So. 3d 574 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
- Miraglia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 770 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Baity v. State, 265 So. 3d 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)