ALFONZO D. PONTON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
The court held that the denial of the defendant's motion for postconviction relief was properly affirmed as successive and an abuse of process.
The defendant appealed the denial of his motion for postconviction relief concerning three prior cases. He had a history of filing numerous unsuccessf…
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 Restrictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals from the denial of his motion for postconviction relief relating to three separate cases from 1982. We affirm. Defendant has to date filed at least thirty-eight postconviction motions and petitions in state court alone; all of those have been unsuccessful. A string citation of all of the decisions would itself fill two entire pages.
We affirm the denial of the motion as successive and as an abuse of process. The defendant is hereafter prohibited from filing any additional pro se appeals, including pleadings, motions, and petitions relating to any issue in Lower Tribunal cases F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758. Any further pleadings, motions, or petitions in those cases must be reviewed and filed by an attorney. See Ali v. State, 729 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
We caution defendant that disregard of this prohibition could further result in forfeiture of all or part of his gain time. See Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); § 944.28(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2001).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ponton v. State, 155 So. 3d 425 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…ions. On October 16, 2002, this court prohibited Ponton “from filing any additional pro se appeals, including pleadings, motions, and petitions relating to any issue in Lower Tribunal cases F81-27294, F81-28089, and F81-25758.” See Ponton v. State, 837 So. 2d 435, 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). As of October 16, 2002, Ponton had filed at least thirty-eight post-conviction motions and petitions in state court alone; all of which were unsuccessful. In contravention of our prohibition in 2002, Ponton continued to fil…
Authorities Cited
- Duncan v. State, 728 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Kasim ALI v. State, 729 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)