×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Florida Supreme Court Bars Repetitious Prison Litigant
The Florida Supreme Court imposed sanction on a state prisoner for repeatedly filing meritless legal petitions with both the First District Court of Appeals and the Florida Supreme Court. Shernerd Richardson was serving his sentence for a sex offense when he appealed the conviction and sentence to Florida’s First District Court of Appeals, which affirmed.
Starting 2009, Richardson filed twelve petitions with the 1st DCA, all of which lacked merit and were dismissed or denied, before being barred from filing further pro se litigation related to his case before Florida First District Court of Appeals. Richardson then turned to the Florida Supreme Court, filing ten times before the court issued the instant order.
The Florida Supreme, as well as the First District Court, relied on the three-prong test in the case of Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004) to determine if the case at bar was unauthorized by virtue of seeking post-conviction relief available through a motion filed in the sentencing court rather than a habeas corpus at a later state.
The court issued a show cause requiring from Richardson reason why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se petitions related to his commitment case. Richardson’s reply was insufficient and the Florida Supreme Court found Richardson’s petition frivolous per Florida statute and imposed sanctions.
The court prohibited Richardson from any further pro se filings related to his case, instructed the Clerk of Court to reject any further legal filings from Richardson unless they are signed by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar Association, and directed the Clerk of the Court to forward a certified copy of the opinion to the institution where Richardson was housed. See: Richardson v. Tucker, 90 So.3d 265 (Fla. 2012).
Starting 2009, Richardson filed twelve petitions with the 1st DCA, all of which lacked merit and were dismissed or denied, before being barred from filing further pro se litigation related to his case before Florida First District Court of Appeals. Richardson then turned to the Florida Supreme Court, filing ten times before the court issued the instant order.
The Florida Supreme, as well as the First District Court, relied on the three-prong test in the case of Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004) to determine if the case at bar was unauthorized by virtue of seeking post-conviction relief available through a motion filed in the sentencing court rather than a habeas corpus at a later state.
The court issued a show cause requiring from Richardson reason why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se petitions related to his commitment case. Richardson’s reply was insufficient and the Florida Supreme Court found Richardson’s petition frivolous per Florida statute and imposed sanctions.
The court prohibited Richardson from any further pro se filings related to his case, instructed the Clerk of Court to reject any further legal filings from Richardson unless they are signed by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar Association, and directed the Clerk of the Court to forward a certified copy of the opinion to the institution where Richardson was housed. See: Richardson v. Tucker, 90 So.3d 265 (Fla. 2012).
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Richardson v. Tucker
| Year | 2012 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 90 So.3d 265 (Fla. 2012) |
| Level | State Supreme Court |