RODNEY CRAIG MOUNTJOY
v.
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 litigant who engages in abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous filings attacking his judgment and sentence may be prohibited from future pro se filings in that matter to conserve judicial resources.
[1] A court may prohibit a pro se litigant from filing further petitions concerning a specific case when the litigant engages in a pattern of abusive, repetitive, malicious,…
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 intelligence“Enough is enough.”
Court's citation to Isley v. State in support of imposing sanctions against abusive pro se filer
Rodney Craig Mountjoy filed repeated pro se petitions attacking his judgment and sentence in Osceola County Circuit Court Case No. 2010-CF-3763. The c…
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 Sanctions For Abusive Litigation cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
RODNEY CRAIG MOUNTJOY, Petitioner, v. Case No. 5D20-1001 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. / Opinion filed July 24, 2020 Petition for Writ of Prohibition, Wayne C. Wooten, Respondent Judge. Rodney Craig Mountjoy, Century, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Due to Petitioner’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filings attacking his judgment(s) and sentence(s) in Osceola County Circuit Court Case No. 2010-CF-3763, this Court issued an order directing Petitioner to show cause why he should not be prohibited from future pro se filings. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999). Petitioner having failed to file a response and thus failing to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, we conclude that he is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.
2
In order to conserve judicial resources, Petitioner is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se filings concerning Osceola County Circuit Court Case No. 2010- CF-3763. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning the referenced case. The Clerk will summarily reject any future filings regarding the referenced case unless filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. See Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (“Enough is enough.”). The Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary proceedings. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2019); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
EVANDER, C.J., ORFINGER and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999)
- Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)