Fernandez v. Department of Corrections
This text of Fernandez v. Department of Corrections (Fernandez v. Department of Corrections) 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.
Opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
No. 1D2023-1898 _____________________________
LOUIS D. FERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent. _____________________________
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus—Original Jurisdiction.
March 13, 2024
PER CURIAM.
Louis D. Fernandez petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus seeking to vacate his conviction. Because the issues Fernandez raises in his petition could have been or were raised on direct appeal, we dismiss his petition as unauthorized. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236, 1245-46 (Fla. 2004).
We also find that this petition is frivolous. We direct the Clerk of the Court to provide a certified copy of this opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections to be forwarded to the appropriate institution or facility for disciplinary procedures under the rules of the Department. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (providing that “[a] prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal . . . or to have brought a frivolous or malicious collateral criminal proceeding . . . is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections”).
Fernandez is warned that any future filings that this court determines to be frivolous may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a prohibition against further pro se filings in this court. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (“[A]ny citizen, including a citizen attacking his or her conviction, abuses the right to pro se access by filing repetitious and frivolous pleadings, thereby diminishing the ability of the courts to devote their finite resources to the consideration of legitimate claims.”).
DISMISSED.
B.L. THOMAS, ROBERTS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Louis D. Fernandez, pro se, Petitioner.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Fernandez v. Department of Corrections, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fernandez-v-department-of-corrections-fladistctapp-2024.