CASHUS D. CUMMINGS
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 a pattern of abusive, repetitive, and frivolous filings attacking his judgment and sentence may be barred from filing further pro se pleadings in that case.
[1] A pro se litigant may be barred from filing further pleadings concerning a particular case when the litigant's filings constitute an abuse of the judicial process through…
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 conclusion regarding repeated frivolous filings in Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).
Cummings filed repeated abusive and frivolous pro se filings attacking his judgment and sentence in a 2010 criminal case from St. Johns County. The co…
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 Frivolous Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Due to Appellant’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filings attacking his judgment and sentence in St. Johns County, Seventh Judicial Circuit Case No. 2010-CF-00032, this Court issued an order directing Appellant 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). Having carefully considered the response and finding it fails to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, we conclude that Appellant is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings.
In order to conserve judicial resources, Appellant is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se filings concerning St. Johns County, Seventh Judicial Circuit Case No. 2010-CF-00032. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning 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). APPELLANT PROHIBITED FROM ANY FURTHER PRO SE FILINGS. LAMBERT, C.J., EVANDER and WALLIS, 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)