OTIS TIMMONS vs STATE OF FLORIDA
This text of OTIS TIMMONS vs STATE OF FLORIDA (OTIS TIMMONS vs 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.
Opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
OTIS TIMMONS,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5D22-1810 LT Case No. 2007-CF-000802-A
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent. ________________________________/
Opinion filed October 14, 2022
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, A Case of Original Jurisdiction.
Otis Timmons, Avon Park, pro se.
No Appearance for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
This Court previously denied Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas
corpus. Due to Petitioner’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his
abusive, repetitive, malicious, or frivolous pro se filings attacking his
judgment and sentence in Marion County Fifth Judicial Circuit Court Case
Number 2007-CF-000802-A, this Court issued an order directing Petitioner
to show cause why he should not be prohibited from future pro se filings.
See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999). Having carefully considered the response and finding it fails to show cause why sanctions should not be
imposed, we conclude that Petitioner is abusing the judicial process and
should be barred from further pro se filings.
In order to conserve judicial resources, Petitioner is prohibited from
filing with this Court any further pro se filings concerning his conviction and
sentence imposed in Marion County case number 2007-CF-000802-A. The
Clerk of this Court is directed to not accept any filings in this case unless they
are signed 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”). The
Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the
appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary proceedings. See §
944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2022); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla.
5th DCA 2005).
SANCTIONS IMPOSED. PETITIONER PROHIBITED FROM
FUTURE FILINGS.
EVANDER, WALLIS AND HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
OTIS TIMMONS vs STATE OF FLORIDA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/otis-timmons-vs-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2022.