PULA
v.
DIXON
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.
Wayne Allen Pula appeals the trial court's denial of his habeas corpus petition seeking release from a life sentence for second-degree murder imposed in 1989. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order and found the appeal frivolous, referring Pula to the Department of Corrections for sanctions.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of Pula's habeas corpus petition, finding no error. The court determined the appeal was frivolous and referred Pula to the Department of Corrections for disciplinary sanctions pursuant to Florida Statute § 944.279.
[1] A court may refer an inmate for disciplinary sanctions under Florida Statute § 944.279 for a frivolous or malicious appeal without requiring a Spencer order when the fili…
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 intelligencePula was convicted of second-degree murder in 1989 and sentenced to life imprisonment. His direct appeal was affirmed in 1991, and he has filed at lea…
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 Sanctions cases and more on FLexlaw
November 13, 2024 PER CURIAM.
Wayne Allen Pula appeals the trial court’s order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he argued he is entitled to immediate release from his life sentence imposed after a 1989 jury trial with a conviction for second-degree murder. Finding no error by the trial court, we affirm.
Pula’s judgment and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. See Pula v. State, 578 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Since then, he has unsuccessfully moved for postconviction relief on at least four other occasions. See Pula v. State, 624 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), Pula v. State, 652 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (affirming order denying postconviction motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a)), Pula v. State, 833 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), Pula v. State, 969 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (barring Pula from future pro se filings in the Fifth District).
The court finds this appeal frivolous and refers Pula 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 Pula 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.
AFFIRMED.
ROWE, KELSEY, and LONG, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ Wayne Allen Pula, pro se, Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Brian R. Flynn-Fallon, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellees.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johans v. State, 901 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…Johans was adjudged guilty of his violent crimes and sentenced as an habitual felony offender. His direct appeals were affirmed 11 and 14 years ago, respectively. Johans v. State, 638 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) [No. 89-1868-CFA]; Johans v. State, 578 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) [No. 89-1924-CFA]. After many unsuccessful post-conviction attacks, he now appeals from the summary denial of his latest post-conviction motion. The trial court denied the motion both on the merits and procedurally as successive…
-
Pula v. Dixon, 578 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)…mediate release from his life sentence imposed after a 1989 jury trial with a conviction for second-degree murder. Finding no error by the trial court, we affirm. Pula’s judgment and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. See Pula v. State, 578 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Since then, he has unsuccessfully moved for postconviction relief on at least four other occasions. See Pula v. State, 624 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), Pula v. State, 652 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) 2 (affirming or…1 / 3
-
Pula v. State, 652 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…ee Pula v. State, 578 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). Pula also collaterally attacked the judgment by filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court’s denial was also affirmed by this court. See Pula v. State, 624 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). The validity of written reasons to support an upward departure from the permissible guidelines sentence is an issue that should and must be raised in the context of the direct appeal. Whether Pula challenged the departure reas…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pula v. Dixon, 578 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)
- Goodloe v. State, 652 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Pula v. State, 969 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)