Darwin J. Fifield, Sr. v. State of Florida

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 13, 2026
Docket5D2025-2285
StatusPublished

This text of Darwin J. Fifield, Sr. v. State of Florida (Darwin J. Fifield, Sr. v. State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Darwin J. Fifield, Sr. v. State of Florida, (Fla. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

Case No. 5D2025-2285 LT Case No. 2013-CF-002406-A _____________________________

DARWIN J. FIFIELD, SR.,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee. _____________________________

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County. Robert William Hodges, Judge.

Darwin J. Fifield, Sr., Punta Gorda, pro se.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona General, for Appellee.

February 13, 2026

PER CURIAM.

Due to Appellant’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his repetitive and frivolous pro se filings attacking the judgments and sentences entered in Marion County Court Case Number 2013-CF- 002406-A, this Court issued an order dated November 4, 2025, directing Appellant to show cause why he should not be prohibited from future pro se filings in this case. 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 this case.

In order to conserve judicial resources, Appellant is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se appeals, petitions, pleadings, or motions pertaining to the convictions and sentences rendered in Marion County Court Case Number 2013-CF-002406- A. 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.”).

APPELLANT PROHIBITED.

JAY, C.J., and MAKAR and MACIVER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Isley v. State
652 So. 2d 409 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Darwin J. Fifield, Sr. v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darwin-j-fifield-sr-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2026.