McCray v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McCray v. State

271 So. 3d 1245

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 28, 2019

DocketNo. 1D19-0015

StatusPublished

This text of 271 So. 3d 1245 (McCray v. State) 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

McCray v. State, 271 So. 3d 1245 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

*1246The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Baker v. State , 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004). Petitioner is warned that any future filings that this Court determines to be frivolous may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a prohibition against any further pro se filings in this Court and a referral to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures as provided in section 944.279, Florida Statutes (2018) (providing that a prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections).

Makar, Osterhaus, and Bilbrey, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

*1246The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Baker v. State , 878 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004). Petitioner is warned that any future filings that this Court determines to be frivolous may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a prohibition against any further pro se filings in this Court and a referral to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures as provided in section 944.279, Florida Statutes (2018) (providing that a prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections).

Makar, Osterhaus, and Bilbrey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 So. 3d 1245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccray-v-state-fladistctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack