SAMSON HYLAND, 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.
Samson Hyland, an incarcerated defendant, appealed the trial court's denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. The appellate court affirmed the denial and issued an order to show cause directing Hyland to explain why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals and motions related to his conviction, given his pattern of successive and repetitive filings.
The trial court's order denying Hyland's Rule 3.850 motion is affirmed. Hyland is directed to show cause within 45 days why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, petitions, motions, or pleadings related to his conviction. If he fails to demonstrate good cause, the court will require all future filings to be reviewed and signed by a licensed Florida attorney, and unauthorized filings will subject him to sanctions including disciplinary referral to the Florida Department of Corrections.
[1] Successive motions that have been heard, considered, and rejected constitute an abuse of process.
[2] Courts have the authority to limit abuses of process by pro se litigants.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“incarcerated persons must be provided with a full panoply of procedural vehicles with which to challenge the lawfulness of their incarceration”
Establishes the principle that prisoners have broad rights to petition courts, but these rights are not unlimited.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHyland has been incarcerated and has filed numerous petitions and appeals to the appellate court since 2014 challenging the legality of his sentence a…
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 Abuse Of Process cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm without discussion the trial court’s Order denying Defendant Samson Hyland’s most recent 3,850 motion.
ORDER TO SHOW, CAUSE
Since 2014 Hyland has filed numerous petitions and appeals .to this Court regarding the legality of his sentence and the evidence presented at his trial,1 We recog*919nize that incarcerated persons must be provided with a full panoply of procedural vehicles with which to challenge the lawfulness of their incarceration. State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999). On the other hand, successive motions which have been heard, considered, rejected and then raised again are an abuse of process, Concepcion v. State, 944 So.2d 1069, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).
This Court has the authority to limit abuses of process by pro se litigants. Consequently, Hyland is hereby directed to show cause within forty-five days of this opinion, as to why he should not be prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other pleadings related to his criminal conviction in circuit court case number F08-21027.
If Hyland does not demonstrate good cause, we will direct the Clerk. of this Court not to accept any such filings unless they have been reviewed by, and bear the signature of, a licensed attorney in good standing with the Florida Bar.
Additionally, and absent a showing of good cause, any further and unauthorized filings by Hyland will subject him to appropriate sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Florida Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action. See, § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2016).
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)
- Moore v. State, 944 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Herman v. Schlesinger, 211 So. 3d 1048 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
- Hyland v. State, 211 So. 3d 1048 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)