David Charles Sussman v. State of Florida

Opinion

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

Case No. 5D2025-0203 LT Case No. 2024-12898-CIDL _____________________________

DAVID CHARLES SUSSMAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee. _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. Dennis P. Craig, Judge.

David Charles Sussman, Arcadia, pro se.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

October 31, 2025

PER CURIAM.

Appellant petitioned this Court for a writ of mandamus related to his Jimmy Ryce case. This Court transferred the petition to the trial court. The petition sought the clerk’s acceptance of various pro se, post-judgment motions, and following a hearing, the trial court denied all the motions except one, which it found to be moot. The following day, it entered the order—which is the subject of this appeal—dismissing the petition. We affirm this order without further discussion.

This Court has previously reviewed and ruled upon multiple meritless and duplicative filings of Appellant stemming from related cases. Because it appears that Appellant’s filings are abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous, Appellant is cautioned that any further pro se filings in this Court asserting claims stemming from Volusia County Circuit Court Case Nos. 2022- 11151-CIDL and 2024-12898-CIDL may result in sanctions such as a bar on pro se filings in this Court. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999); Lavender v. State, 6 So. 3d 713, 714 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009).

AFFIRMED; APPELLANT CAUTIONED.

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

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________