VICTOR HICKS
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND 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.
A pro se prisoner's repetitive and frivolous procedural motions may be denied with a warning that continued abusive filings will result in sanctions including prohibition on future pro se filings and referral for disciplinary proceedings.
[1] A court may impose sanctions including prohibition of pro se filings and referral for prison disciplinary proceedings against a pro se prisoner who files abusive, repetit…
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 intelligenceVictor Hicks, a pro se prisoner, filed a third procedural motion in his mandamus petition against the Department of Corrections and the State of Flori…
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 Prison Disciplinary Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________ Case No. 5D2024-2169 LT Case No. 2024-CA-000577 _____________________________ VICTOR HICKS, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT of CORRECTIONS and STATE of FLORIDA, Respondents. _____________________________ Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Pamela Stinnette Vergara, Judge. Victor Hicks, Malone, pro se. No Appearance for Respondents. February 21, 2025
PER CURIAM
Upon consideration of Petitioner’s recently filed third procedural motion, and this Court’s denial of Petitioner’s petition for writ of mandamus stemming from Hernando County Circuit Court Case No. 2024-CA-000577, September 20, 2024, we deny Petitioner’s motion. Because it appears that Petitioner’s filings are abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous, Petitioner is cautioned that any further pro se filings in this Court asserting claims stemming from the identified case number may result in sanctions
2 such as a bar on pro se filing in this Court and referral to prison officials for disciplinary proceedings, which may include forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2025); State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999).
MOTION DENIED; PETITIONER CAUTIONED.
WALLIS, HARRIS and KILBANE, JJ., concur.
3 _____________________________