Keith L. Calvin v. State of Florida
This text of Keith L. Calvin v. State of Florida (Keith L. Calvin v. State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Supreme Court of Florida ____________
No. SC2023-0268 ____________
KEITH L. CALVIN, Petitioner,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent.
September 7, 2023
PER CURIAM.
Keith L. Calvin, an inmate in state custody, filed a pro se
petition with this Court seeking a writ of mandamus. 1 On April 27,
2023, we dismissed the instant petition, expressly retained
jurisdiction to pursue possible sanctions against Calvin, and
directed Calvin to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for
his repeated misuse of this Court’s limited resources. Calvin v.
State, No. SC2023-0268, 2023 WL 3117265 (Fla. Apr. 27, 2023);
see Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a) (Sanctions; Court’s Motion). We now
1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(8), Fla. Const. find that Calvin has failed to show cause why he should not be
barred, and we sanction him as set forth below.
Calvin was convicted of second-degree murder in the Circuit
Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit, in and for Marion County,
Florida, case number 422004CF000536CFAXXX, and was
sentenced as a habitual violent felony offender to life imprisonment
on September 12, 2006. On October 30, 2007, the Fifth District
Court of Appeal per curiam affirmed Calvin’s conviction and
sentence. Calvin v. State, 969 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
(table). A corrected judgment of conviction and sentence was
entered on March 23, 2009.
Since 2009, Calvin has demonstrated a pattern of vexatious
filing of meritless pro se requests for relief in this Court related to
case number 422004CF000536CFAXXX. Including the petition in
the instant case, Calvin has filed eight pro se petitions with this
Court. 2 The Court has never granted Calvin the relief sought in any
of his filings here; all the petitions were dismissed or denied, with
2. See Calvin v. State, No. SC2023-0268, 2023 WL 3117265 *1 (Fla. Apr. 27, 2023).
-2- the exception of one that was transferred. His petition in this case
is no exception. Calvin reasserted his previously raised claim that
the State was barred from prosecuting the charge against him
because the applicable statute of limitations in effect at the time of
his crime had expired. 3 On April 27, 2023, we denied the instant
petition and directed Calvin to show cause why he should not be
barred from filing any further pro se requests for relief in this
Court.
In response to this Court’s show cause order, Calvin maintains
that his conviction is unlawful, and that he has a constitutional
right to merits review by this Court of his underlying claim.
Upon consideration of Calvin’s response, we find that he has
failed to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed.
Therefore, based on Calvin’s extensive history of filing pro se
petitions and requests for relief that were meritless or otherwise
3. Calvin raised essentially the same claim in habeas petitions previously filed in the Court, including case numbers SC2020-0430 (Baker dismissal), SC2017-0351 (Pettway dismissal), SC2015-1955 (Baker dismissal), and SC2014-1464 (Baker dismissal), as well as in a petition to invoke the Court’s all writs jurisdiction (case number SC2012-2228; denied for lack of jurisdiction).
-3- inappropriate for this Court’s review, we now find that he has
abused the Court’s limited judicial resources. See Pettway v.
McNeil, 987 So. 2d 20, 22 (Fla. 2008) (explaining that this Court
has previously “exercised the inherent judicial authority to sanction
an abusive litigant” and that “[o]ne justification for such a sanction
lies in the protection of the rights of others to have the Court
conduct timely reviews of their legitimate filings”). If no action is
taken, Calvin will continue to burden the Court’s resources. We
further conclude that Calvin’s mandamus petition filed in this case
is a frivolous proceeding brought before the Court by a state
prisoner. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2022).
Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any
future pleadings or other requests for relief submitted by Keith L.
Calvin that are related to case number 422004CF000536CFAXXX,
unless such filings are signed by a member in good standing of The
Florida Bar. Furthermore, because we have found Calvin’s petition
to be frivolous, we direct the Clerk of this Court, pursuant to
section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes (2022), to forward a copy of this
opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections’ institution or
facility in which Calvin is incarcerated.
-4- No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by
this Court.
It is so ordered.
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, LABARGA, FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur. COURIEL and GROSSHANS, JJ., dissent.
Original Proceeding – Mandamus
Keith L. Calvin, pro se, Milton, Florida,
for Petitioner
No appearance for Respondent
-5-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Keith L. Calvin v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keith-l-calvin-v-state-of-florida-fla-2023.